Film and History from Sage Handbook, Donald and Renov, eds.
sophia M O R G A N S Tyler
Sign up for access to the world's latest research
checkGet notified about relevant papers
checkSave papers to use in your research
checkJoin the discussion with peers
checkTrack your impact
Abstract
AI
AI
This essay discusses the intersection of film and history, exploring how film serves as both an archive and a medium that shapes our understanding of historical narratives. It highlights the power of moving images to capture and convey the complexities of the past, challenging the idea that photographic representations are inherently less ambiguous than written accounts. The analysis reflects on the ontological similarities between film and history, asserting that both mediums engage with temporality and representation, ultimately suggesting that the evolution of film has enriched historiography and will continue to be vital in understanding historical contexts in the future.
Key takeaways
- How have historical method and practice been shaped by film?
- The intersection of film and history by definition needs to account for a history o/ film and its institutions.
- Yet historians have become invested in commercial films because they recognize that film and television offer the largest audience for historical narratives.
- For example, one could try to understand the connection between the release of a film like McCabe & Mrs. Miller (RobertAltman, US) in l97l and the simultaneous rise of social history.
- Film is like history, it has been the archive of history since 1895, and it helps us think about history.
Related papers
Film and the Historical Imagination
Course Description: Memory, history and time work through the cinematic narrative in ways that make the medium significantly different from all the other art forms. Film in a variety of ways lends itself to the possibility of organizing not just historical knowledge but also comments on the nature of historical narration. As an archive of sensations, of emotions, of images and of sounds, film works as a powerful recorder of life and its events, and as a form of witnessing and testimony. Ideas of the past as they permeate the present through cinema will be analyzed in this course by looking at the different ways in which films make connections between history and evidence, between history and the present, between historical narration and the historical event, and between memory and representation. If the history of cinema is a history of the 20th century, it contains within its archive a history of modern subjectivity (Geoffrey Nowell-Smith). Moving through popular genres, documentaries, art cinema and avant-garde film practice, the course will explore the intricate relationship between film and history as it unfolds in the terrain of World Cinema.
History in Images/History in Words: Reflections on the Possibility of Really Putting History onto Film
The American Historical Review, 1988
My initial attempt to look at the broad issues posed for the historian by film, this essay was the first piece on historical film to be published in the American Historical Review. Like many of the essays to follow, it is a mixture of personal and theoretical concerns. So much difficulty did I have in keeping the ideas in line that in its original form, the piece consisted of thirty-four numbered and disconnected paragraphs. T/ie editor insisted the AHR could .not publish it unless the paragraphs were glued together in normal scholarly form. This did not make them more coherent, but it may well have kept readers from being even more upset than they were at the invasion of the journal by discussions of this new medium.
Historiography as Cinematography: A Prolegomenon to Film Work for Historians
, quondam scholar, teacher, and university president said, seeing the didactic usefulness of 'The Birth of A Nation', which first came to the screen in 1915. Famous propagandists were equally quick to perceive the importance of the new medium. Lenin and Trotsky saw its value for their political message. 'Of all the arts,' Lenin said, 'cinema is the most important instrument.' Reichminister for Propaganda, Dr. Paul Joseph Goebbels, took control of the German film industry early on and turned feature films and the German Weekly Newsreels into masterpieces of the art of deception.' Scholar-president and political leaders who sought to move the great mass of their peoples-these men quickly saw the radically different uses of film for recalling the past. Since the early twentieth century, when amazing new devices for locomotion, communication and for increasing production and comfort suddenly broke through to the public consciousness, thinkers and users alike have tried to grapple with their long-term, often unintended effects. One of these new devices was, of course, the moving picture. Like the still camera earlier, it revolutionized the possibilities of representation and consequently deeply affected patterns of thought. The cinematograph was first used for public entertainment, but soon showed its potential as an information-providing device. Today, historians, like their students and the public, sit before cinema and television screens watching, being entertained by, and learning from filmed history in romanticized 'features' and seemingly objective documentaries. Seeing something on film often becomes 'being there', as Roland Barthes has said.2 Everywhere, history reported in film has been influential and there is firm evidence of its pedagogical effects.3
A Very Long Engagement: The Use of Cinematic Texts in Historical Research
Film, History and Memory, 2015
The essay offers a survey of the literature concerning the use of cinematic texts in historical research, from the publication of Kracauer's classic From Caligari to Hitler to the most recent contributions. It singles out the principal tendencies shown by the scholars who engaged in this particular field of research such as: the use of raw unedited footage as a record of historical events and personalities; the analysis of institutionally sponsored film in order to gain insight into the motives of sponsoring institutions like governments and political parties, the idea that feature films might be indicators of the moral values, prejudices, ideas, and political and social tensions running through a society at a given time. The essay also offers an account of the major theoretical contribution by authors like Marc Ferro, Pierre Sorlin, and John E. O'Connor. The paper's ultimate purpose is to take stock of the progress made by scholars in this well-established and yet, in many respects, still controversial research thread. 'We need to study film and see it in relation to the world that produces it. What is our hypothesis? That film, image or not of reality, document or fiction, true story or pure invention, is history.' M. Ferro, Cinema and History (Detroit: Wayne State University, 1988), p. 29. Historians basing their research principally on cinematic texts may, at times, feel unease with regard to the epistemological foundations of their research. This is due to a number or reasons. First of all, to study films, or principally films rather than written documents, means to go against a long and illustrious tradition of historiographical studies which has normally privileged written texts over visual evidence as primary sources for historical research. Secondly, within the range of visual sources, historians have for a long time been especially suspicious of cinematic texts. Finally, a universally accepted, coherent and comprehensive methodology for studying film as a source for historical analysis has not yet been formulated. This awareness accounts for the title of the essay: cinema and history have had a very long engagement, but a proper wedding has yet to be celebrated. It is worth noting that the longterm diffidence of historians towards film is not entirely unreasonable. The use of cinematic texts as historical sources presents difficult theoretical problems with respect to their
Writing the History of the "Cinema" Problem: Media Archaeology With Historical Epistemology
At the Borders of (Film) History: Temporality, Archaeology, Theories, edited by Alberto Beltrame, Giuseppe Fidotta, Andrea Mariani, 2015
In the last thirty years, our discipline has known many shifts and changes, moving from film history to new film history, to media archeology, and possibly to cinema history. The variety of these names reflects transformations in methods and approaches as well as in objects, from classical film masterpieces to early film or "pre-cinema" (and/or "post-cinema") apparatus, and from the dark screening room to the vast array of screens populating today's world. Film or cinema historians have moved away from linear narratives to favor accounts of complex cultural circulations. Media archaeologists have turned to forgotten, obsolete machineries, to understand the dynamic balance of media evolution, and to replace the diversity of contemporary viewing devices within long or very long histories where they could be confronted and tested against intricate genealogies of real or imaginary objects. These methods, set against traditional film history, vastly enriched and complexified our view of the history of cinema. But still, certain aspects of that evolution of media or "dispositives" remain difficult to account for. Other disciplines know similar difficulties, like the history of science or of technology: how can we explain the newness of a certain discovery or invention, without reducing this newness either to the genius of the great men on the one hand, or to the simple and unproblematic continuity of history? Media archeology has tended to isolate apparatuses and objects from one another, but some historical moments have remained reluctant to that dispersion into fragments. Some tension seems to be at work at certain points in history, a tension which is concretely productive for the people involved. What I would propose here, using the conceptual tools proposed by the French tradition of historical epistemology, is to decenter the analysis from objects to problems. Problems are in fact what inventors, technicians, engineers, and users deal with; they are intrinsically historical and operative. They point toward an imagined solution -in a sense, they carry an intrinsic teleology. That solution may be utopian, impossible, or only a small transformation of a difficult or painful technique. It may be consciously and precisely formulated by the operator, or remain only a vague project. In any case, it embodies the orientation of historical evolution at that precise moment. Let us take an example. At some point in the nineteenth century, a young man, 26 years old, has an idea. He imagines a machine capable of wonderful things:
Critical approaches to the history film - a field in search of a methodology
Rethinking History, 2007
This article consists of an extended review of Robert Rosenstone's book, History on Film/Film on History (Pearson, 2006). The review evaluates three key contributions: first, the description of the development of a field of study dedicated to examining the relationship between film and history; second, Rosenstone's demand that history on film be judged not in relation to written history but as a valid and productive form of representation in its own right; and, third, the book's presentation of a taxonomy of the history film.
Engines of the Historical Imagination: Towards a Phenomenology of Film as Non-Art
Hanich, J. and D. Fairfax (eds.), The Structures of the Film Experience by Jean-Pierre Meunier. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press, 2019
Combining Jean-Pierre Meunier's notion of film-souvenir, which originally only referred to home movies, with Daniel Yacavone's phenomenology of film form, this contribution sketches the outline of a phenomenology of film experience which covers the entirety of what Eric de Kuyper proposes to call the "vast-domain of cinema as non-art," a domain that includes orphan films, ephemeral films and other forms of utility films.
Reflections on What the Filmmaker Historian Does (to History)
Film, History and Memory, 2015
Related topics
Related papers
The future of history as film: apropos the publication of A Companion to Historical Film
In the past three decades, due to the work of some distinguished historians, the discussion of film is being slowly integrated into Western historiography. However, while relatively few academic historians would deny today film’s ability to instigate awareness to and enrich the understanding of historical experiences, many fewer are willing – and able – to incorporate film analysis in their own research and teaching. This impasse is particularly apparent in the case of “historical films,” in which past events and experiences are reconstructed, invented and framed in varying degrees of sophistication. The convincing arguments that established film as a “legitimate” narrator of historical reality often fell short of explicating how film should be integrated into academic history discourse. This article reads Rosenstone and Parvulescu’s recent collection of essays A Companion to Historical Film as a demonstration of different approaches taken by contemporary historians in an attempt to meet this challenge. Within this context, it identifies four paradigms, each involves different premises about the nature of film’s realism, its role as an agent of social change, and its dialog with “conventional” (national, institutional, etc.) narration of the past. The analysis of these paradigms – and the ways they have been implemented by the contributors to A Companion to Historical Film – shows their potential contribution to the study of historical realities, as well as their weaknesses and limitations. Insightfully presenting and discussing these approaches, I argue, Rosenstone and Parvulescu’s volume is an important step forward in the ongoing endeavor to methodologically incorporate film analysis in the academic research of history.
Discursive Divergences Between Film Medium and Historical Science
Culture Crossroads
Representation of history is the most powerful formative factor of historical insights in society in the 20th and 21st century. Currently, there have been a number of films in production which interpret Latvian history, thus raising the profile of issues relating to the portrayal of the history of the cinema. This article conceptualises the discursive differences between historical research and historical films in order to create a basis for further studies of historical films and their adequacy for the research perspective. This article also outlines the historical features of the cinema, as well as the possibility of an alternative historical narrative: a hybridised form of a historical account created by film.
The Cinematograph as an Agent of History
2016
Since the late 1970s, when the history of photography became an academic subject, and with increasing interest in photography in the art market, there have been frequent calls by various scholars for a 'new kind of history' of photography. These calls were part of what Rosalind Krauss and Annette Michelson described in a special photography issue of October (1978) as a renewed scholarly 'discovery' of the medium, characterized by the 'sense of an epiphany, delayed and redoubled in its power' (Krauss and Michelson, 1978: 3). This rediscovery carried the message that photography and its practices have to be redeemed 'from the cultural limbo to which for a century and a half it had been consigned' (1978: 3). The calls for a new history of photography suggested that the time has come to substitute Beaumont Newhall's hegemonic modernist classic The History of Photography from 1839 to the Present with a new text (1939). 1 Newhall was a librarian and later the first director of photography of the Museum of Modern Art in New York. His work is considered as 'the English-language text that has shaped thinking on the subject more permanently than any other' (Nickel, 2001: 550). Based on the catalogue of his MoMA exhibition Photography 1839-1937, 'usually cited as a crucial step in the acceptance of photography as fullfledged museum art' (Phillips, 1992: 17), this book was the predominant photo-history for more than 50 years. It shifted the historiographic focus from the chemical-physical aspect of the medium to its visual aspect.
The Challenge of Film Considered as Historical Research
Cultural Studies Review, 2011
The article focuses on the use of film as a medium of historical research. It discusses the film "Shoah," directed by Claude Lanzmann, which is considered as a model for filmic history. It also looks into Robert Rosenstone's claim that people may consider filmmakers as historians and that people should derive theory from practice through analyzing how the past has been portrayed in films.
The Crisis of History/the Promise of Film
Media International Australia, 1996
Representations of history in cinema
Custen (1992) argues that our understanding of the world is shaped by the filmic representation of history and important historical figures. This essay explores the arguments around the (mis)representation of history in film.
Film and History: Towards a General Ontology
2021
Introduction: Cinema and Modern Life From politics to tourism, and from space travel to mental health, cinema has affected many aspects of modern life. The use of propaganda has been widely known and studied. Films have successfully communicated all kinds of messages, both political and commercial. The most visible effects on audience behavior can probably be found in film-induced tourism, 1 which has become a field of study in its own right, bringing together students of
Film as a Source for Cultural History: an Experiment in Practical Methodology
History Workshop Journal, 2004
The Filmic Image as a Modernist Apparatus. Cinematographic Devices in Historical Narrative
Metatheoria Revista De Filosofia E Historia De La Ciencia, 2013
Calling into question the idea of progress, as it has been done by contemporary approaches in philosophy of history and historical epistemology, entails accepting the impossibility of replacing it by another idea that puts forward a unified sense of history. The decline of metanarratives and of great emancipatory accounts requires a concept of representation that takes into consideration new ways in which human and social temporality appear and a new matrix that links past, present and future. The new notion of representation must also be attentive to new artistic interventions that, either from vanguardist or classic experiences, revisit the pairs "art/history" and "art/politics" by considering the potentialities of art, in general, and films, in particular, to compose narratives that are attuned to an experience of time marked by the crises of representationalism. For this reason, this paper starts by analyzing the crisis of progressive narratives, and its consequences for writing the past, in order to examine both the potentialities of cinematographic images for historical epistemology and the importance of Hayden White's recent work about the ways to conceptualize contemporary historical experience.
Loading Preview
Sorry, preview is currently unavailable. You can download the paper by clicking the button above.