Ken Burns

[MikeBSG]

Since PBS has been promoting the heck out of it, let's have a Ken Burns thread set up for his new WWII documentary.

What do you think of Burns' documentaries? I liked "Civil War," found "Baseball" too long, and didn't bother watching "Jazz."

As for "The War," I was a bit worried when I watched the half-hour promo for it, and Burns was patting himself on the back for making a documentary that didn't talk to historians or use maps.

[moira finnie]

From what I understand, The War, which is going to be seen in seven parts on PBS starting on Sept. 23rd, is attempting to show the personal experience of WWII from the POV of the veterans and those on the homefront, not from a truly historical viewpoint. While I've seen about half of The Civil War, Baseball and a few of the Jazz documentaries, I enjoy most of what Ken Burns and his merry band do, though yes, they do sometimes seem a bit self-congratulatory. However, at the end of that 30 min. promo on PBS last night, when the brief sequence about the guy slipping into his home through the back door after being away was broadcast, I instantly started to choke up. Guess I'll need a fresh hankie to get through this one!

I think that Burns is responding to the country's rediscovery of the Greatest Generation as they leave us. Of course, Saving Private Ryan, and Band of Brothers and other projects have tapped into this previously, but I think the emphasis now is on gathering as much first hand information as possible from the few vets who are still with us and recording it on video or in written form asap.

Interestingly, I work in peripherally with a facility that treats elderly residents. As many of them age, and yes, even as they lift anchor, and start to sail away from us, many of the elderly residents relive their experiences, or talk about them for the first time since the war. Sometimes this is a lessening of the burdens of memory for them and sometimes it's as though they are reliving them. Veterans who never told their grown children anything about their experiences, Holocaust victims who endured and thrived, and many who lost loved ones find their memories tumbling out of them at the end of their lives. If Ken Burns manages to honor them for a few hours and makes a few bucks in the process, okay by me.

Re: WWII Historians.
It seems to me that Max Hastings, John Keegan and other historians are usually broadcast 24/7 on History International, The Military Channel and good ol' History Channel enough. I do find that since the mid-90s when much more of the classified info relating to WWII was released, I am fascinated with some of the revelations.

Re: Maps
Your mention of the lack of maps amused me.

My Dad, who was in what he laughingly called "military intelligence", and was trained in map & photographic analysis, spoke German, French and Yiddish (as the only Irish American in his Williamsburg, NY neighborhood in the '30s he had to learn it), claimed that even though he and his cohorts would plead with brass to pay attention to the reports from interrogations of prisoners and topographical photos indicating such little events as the Bulge in Belgium in late '44. What action was taken was often too little and too late. He had little respect for all military institutions. I'm still trying to find out more details of his military career, since he was one of those guys who took the oath of secrecy very seriously. He let little info escape, and when he did after my childish questions, old nightmares about entering the concentration camps and more would return. I gradually learned to leave some topics alone.

Interestingly, I was in touch with a friend of his from France who had served as a Resistance contact. He had been so impressed with my Dad and Americans in general, he and his wife named their first born son Joseph (for my dad) Franklin Roosevelt Andres. Believe it or not, there are pockets of France where Americans are still cherished.

Anyway, here's the PBS site related to the upcoming series:

http://www.pbs.org/thewar/

[Sue Sue Applegate]

My dad was one of those fellows who talked about very few of his actual battle experiences even though he had many. He and my Mom attended many reunions of the 802 Tank Destroyers unit. Most of the fellows he shipped out with were from the New York area, and sadly, most of the folks on the mailing list have slipped away from us, taking their determination, their fortitude, and their strength with them, along with all those great stories.

Dad had his entire army paycheck sent home to mom and lived, much like the James Garner character in The Great Escape as a "scrounger."

I was told he would often lend money until payday, played poker, craps, sold apple brandy, and was often considered the first "can do" man to come to in a scrape, whether militarily or financially. At least that's what the family mythology and his own "press releases" indicate. He was with Patton's 3rd, and landed on June 9, 1945, on the Ile de France.

If I'm not working, I'll be watching the special on PBS.

[Mr. Arkadin]

Personally, I find Ken Burns revisonist history lessons quite annoying and find it embarassing that people actually take them for truth instead of looking this stuff up. However, I think if any of his work encourages people to learn about the topics he chooses to film that's a good thing.

I also thought it was great on the Jazz theme that he actually had CD's done of all of the heavily profiled artists (kind of a little greatest hits package) so if you liked something you heard you could get a CD of the basic works of the artist.

I think when you are talking about history (or anything else) you can't just go with one source. Unfortunately there are many people who view Burns as the utimate authority on the subjects he chooses to film which he clearly is not.

[Sue Sue Applegate]

I certainly agree that Ken Burns is revisionist, but I have to hand it to him on the Jazz CD's. All the compilations for the series were heavily laden with favorites on my wish lists for the performers selected.

And I think, like all documentary filmmakers, that he has to select his stance and approach to his topic because a film cannot archive all written history on several celluloid hours. Such films are always a foray into the personal choices of the directors.

Reading personal stories from our posters are always so enlightening and entertaining for me.

I think I will start a new thread about this idea.

[Mr. Arkadin]

[quote="Sue Sue Applegate"]I certainly agree that Ken Burns is revisionist, but I have to hand it to him on the Jazz CD's. All the compilations for the series were heavily laden with favorites on my wish lists for the performers selected.

Totally agree. That's one of the best ways to get people into the music.

Such films are always a foray into the personal choices of the directors.


Again I agree. I did not mean to raise a stink about KB. I obviously have strong feelings about his work. If others enjoy it, that's great.

[movieman1957]

I find the whole topic of both world wars really fascinating. Nearly everything today is so much a part of what went on that people should know.

I recently watched an "American Experience" documentary on the Battle of The Bulge. Very little narration (David McCullough) a lot of stories by those who were there. Amazing stuff. Most of these men were still teenagers. I have seen the 26 hour "The World At War" narrated by Olivier and that is a most interesting series. Countless other documentaries show tragic personal stories amidst what were seemingly cataclysmic events. If you don't like Burns there are plenty of other sources from which to learn.

WWI seems to have been just stupid but it wasn't long before they were all too far in to get out. Tens of millions of lives gone in both wars.

[MikeBSG]

Apparently there is a mini-controversy over "The War" before it even airs. Some PBS stations want a no-cussing version of the show so they can't be fined by the FCC and its post-"Janet Jackson's boob" rules.

Didn't something like this happen with the showing of "Saving Private Ryan" on network TV? I don't think anyone got fined then. Is this some crafty way of intimidating the FCC?

[movieman1957]

Mike:

There was an issue with "Pvt. Ryan" when ABC showed it. The FCC's issue was that they were not going to give a pre-broadcast ruling on whether there would be a fine. ABC, if I remember, wasn't initially going to show it without the assurance they wouldn't be fined. Eventually something got worked out and they did show it but there were frequent disclaimers.

That's two problems for Burns. You probably remember the problem over the lack of Hispanics in the original program. That's been addressed.

[MikeBSG]

Well, now that "The War" has started airing, what do you think of it?

I couldn't watch the first episode all the way through because of phone calls, etc. Still, it was very well done, I thought, and did for the most part show footage that wasn't really familiar.

[Erebus]

I caught about 90 minutes last night and regret not seeing more. I'm pretty undisciplined in my viewing habits.

However, even though I enjoyed it, I found the jumps/segues rather arbitrary, meaning from front to home, and from combat theatre to theatre.

As an air force brat who grew up building models of WWII aircraft and who seems to have grown up wondering about personal honor and virtue, I'm fascinated by just about every facet of WWII, from the air to naval, both surface and submarine, Atlantic to Pacific; to the army: infantry, armor, artillery or whatever; tactics to strategy; individuals to units of every scale. WWII put so many, even almost all, aspects of the human condition both under the microscope and within the view of the telescope. So I've spent thousands of hours ingesting material having to do with WWII, which means I have enjoyed Burns' take.

But, as I said, I don't get the organization of what he is presenting. Maybe that's what he intends. Maybe he is acknowledging how it must have seemed to those who experienced it firsthand, when the outcome was in doubt. Maybe he intends for us/me to be confused.

But, I must confess that I am ALWAYS suspicious of PBS, especially when it comes to anything sociological or political, and any present-day treatment of the experience of war is unavoidably political. It pains me to say it, especially on a forum such as this, but I’m not sure it serves the security of the nation, or that of the culture, to entertain anything remotely resembling an objective, meaning scientific or artistic, portrayal of the nature of war.

I’m not generally a patriotic rah-rah kind of guy (in fact I’m more than a little nihilistic, philosophically and sociobiogically speaking), but when we’re at war, and yes, I do think there is a “we”, I think we may be better served, assuming we want to prevail, by illusion than by attempts at objective truth. Though I’ve never been in combat, I have no doubt that war is hell, both on the battlefield and on the homefront, but I don’t think it’s appropriate for us to emphasize that right now.

It is my opinion that in general people don't realize just where we are within the history of cultural development. Too many advocate principles, however worthy, that seem way out in front of geopolitical actualities. Point being, I don’t know that honesty about the stark realities of warfare are in service of the task at hand. I assume I’ll either be ignored or chastised for expressing this opinion, but, as an animal on this rock in the midst of what I take to be the voids of space and time, I feel it is my duty, yes, duty, to say this: sometimes freedom and truth, as attributes of human culture, can be preserved only by selective acquiescence to illusion, and until humanity wraps its mind around that, we are in danger.

Right now the United States, and Western culture generally, would be better served by propaganda than by attempts at truth about the nature of war. That has been typical of the human condition back to before the point that humans first developed language or the ability to manipulate imagery: the illusion must come first. Truth, and freedom, are just the fruit (and, in and of themselves, mostly illusory). First the lie, the lie of priority if you will, and only then the stab at truth, if we're lucky. Please excuse me for getting political about this, but to my mind this Burns' series is necessarily political, and to treat it as anything less would be dishonest.

[movieman1957]

At least for WWII propaganda (which is often an ugly word) was important from a point of keeping the citizenry in full support. Part of Burns' topic the other night was about fighting the war at home. Coupons, recycling, rationing. There was a use for everything , so it seemed, and people did their part in participating. They knew they were making difference and that is what mattered. There was a definite benefit to the country in the public not knowing everything. Imagine the problems raising money in the war bond drives if people felt they were in a losing or unjust cause.

[Mr. Arkadin]

If you are interested in KB's intent, there was an interesting article in Newsweek (last week) where he talks about the film. It definitely convinced me not to watch his film (for the record I have watched about 80% of what he has released), but I'll probably catch some of it on reruns sometime just to be informed about what he is up to these days.

[MikeBSG]

I have watched most of "The War." I missed a good chunk of last night (June-July 1944). I have to say that I've enjoyed it more than I thought I would. I too found the "Newsweek" article rather irritating, which makes me glad that I tuned in anyway.

I like the way that each episode opens with the disclaimer that WWII was fought in so many places by so many people that it would be impossible to include them all and that this is the story of four American cities/towns in the war.

So far, I find "The War" striking an admirable balance between military history and social history. If you look at the average college American history textbook today, you will find much more on Rosie the Riveter and the black migration to the cities than you will on the battles in the Pacific or in Italy. I am impressed that Burns is giving as much coverage as he is to the military side of things.

The series is already embroiled in yet another controversy. Apparently, "The War" mis-named the town where the five Sullivan brothers came from, and an Iowa congressman is calling for Burns to appologize.

[klondike]

The series is already embroiled in yet another controversy. Apparently, "The War" mis-named the town where the five Sullivan brothers came from, and an Iowa congressman is calling for Burns to appologize.

Well, good luck to Iowa!
We who reside here in Windham County, Vermont & Cheshire County, New Hampshire have pretty much given-up even trying to get Sahib Burns to murmur a sotto voce "sorry" as he charges about cutting into check-out lines, insulting wait-staff, screaming threats into cell phones, avalanching merchants with his haute-cuisine entourage, and badgering local service providers into discounting their invoices, lest they face the wrath of his legion of attorneys.
Far different than the regional personnae of celebrities like Whoopi Goldberg, Christopher Lloyd, Carly Simon, Frank Miller, Ron Howard, Joe Walsh, Tantoo Cardinale, Richard Gere, Steven Tyler, Carlton Fiske, Adam Sandler and the late Charles Bronson, all of whom lived, moved & breathed, overall, in a warm & gentle manner betwixt our granite hills.
Heck, no less an icon than Ray Bolger kept a vacation home less than a mile from where now stands Mr. Burns' ominous Florentine Film Works studio, and so great was the warmhearted rapport between RB and that town, that he named his Sunday evening radio show after the village common his front door faced: Washington Square.
Don't misunderstand me please: I am probably as great a fan of Ken Burns work as anyone posting on this site . . but as for Ken Burns my neighbor - if tomorrow I witnessed his shoes bursting into flames on Main Street, I doubt I'd empty my bladder to rescue his trousers.