Works Cited

Works Cited

Lerner, Gerda. “The Necessity of History.” In her, why History matters: Oxford University Press. 1997. 122-128.  Web.

Rosenstone, Robert A. “History on Film: Film on History.” Edinburgh Gate, UK: Pearson Education Limited, 2006. Print.

Smith, Bonnie G. “Europe in the Contemporary World 1900 to the Present: A Narrative History with Documents.” Boston: Bedford/St. Martin’s, 2007. Print.

Stansell, Christine. “Reds.” Rev. of Reds, dir. Warren Beatty. Web.

Cuban Revolution

• Film Title: Cuban Revolution
• Original Year of Production: Unknown
• Studio: Unknown
• Director: Glenn Gebhard 
• Producers: John LaCorte, Mario Congreve, Brian Sisselman, Glenn Gebhard

   The Cuban Revolution was a glimpse into the Cuban Revolution against the United States and Cuba's previous Batista government in favor of radical socialism, that has been the norm in Cuba for over fifty years. In addition, the film covers the split of Cuban support in America and in Cuba for, and against socialism led under Fidel Castro. The film examines different issues such as the commercial and economic trade embargo enacted by the United States against Cuba after Cuba nationalized all private lands of United States citizens and it's corporations. Throughout the film both popular sides to this and other issues are examined by supporters of the United States and their respective policies and supporters of Cuba and it's radical socialist government. The thesis of this film becomes apparent towards the end of the film. When various men and women are interviewed in Cuba and the U.S. they seem to agree on one thing. They want to establish a peaceful and healthy relationship with each other. Regardless of political views, the fact that both nations can prosper from the lifting of the trade embargo is reason enough to revive a healthy and respectful diplomatic relationship.

   The filmaker of this film is Dominguez Hills graduate Mario Congreve. Although my experience with Cuban and American relations are limited I do believe that this quality film has much to offer people with limited knowledge of the subject. The film ties different viewpoints of Communist party members, Cuban defectors in Miami, young children and adolescents in Cuba, college professors and Phd's in Cuba and America. The film views their points such as the lack of clothing, shoes and even the rationing of food to as little as four eggs, per person, every month. Presenting the film with different viewpoints is reflective of Rosenstone referers to as "Contest history."(118) In contest history, the general viewpoints of the film go against the general views of a particular subject. In including the views of the pro-revolutionary Cubans, the film runs against the traditional views which Americans would usually be subjected. In presenting such various contrasting arguments such as Capitalism and Socialism the film directors follow more closely in line with the duties of a historian; the duties of focusing more of actual events and movements and letting the audience determin its own meaning.

Reds

• Film Title: Reds
• Original Year of Production: 1981
• Studio: Paramount Pictures
• Director: Warren Beatty
• Cast: Warren Beatty-Jack Reed, Diane Keaton-Louise Bryant, Edward Herman-Max Eastman, Jack Nicolson-Eugene O'neill
• Prodcuers: Dede Allen, Warren Beatty, David Leigh Mcleod and Simon Relph

The film Reds is meant to emulate the life of journalist and radical communism advocate John “Jack” Reed. Jack was born to a wealthy Oregon couple in 1987. He became famous for covering the Mexican Revolution in the pages of Metropolitan Magazine. Shortly thereafter Jack became heavily involved in Communist rhetoric. The film is heavily tied to Jack's involvement in Communism, especially towards the end when Jack and Louise Bryant travel to Russia to witness the toppling of Russia's Provisional Gorvernment and the rise of Bolshevism in 1917. However, a majority of the film consists of Jack and his relationship with young feminist reporter Louise Bryant. At the beginning of the film Jack Reed begins to develop a strong bond with Louise Bryant and they eventually move to New York City together and become a couple. This leads into clips of love, infidelity, and reconciliation on both their parts. However, the film also focuses on the early Feminist movement with Mary Louis Bryant. In the film Louis Bryant was a strong and independent writer that was competing for recognition of her talents in a male dominated news-world. In the film, Mary Bryant leaves to Europe in order to seek work as a war correspondent and Reed followers her and makes a promise to take her to Russia with him, under platonic terms. He stated that she would be referred to as “Miss Bryant” and not “Mrs. Reed”. According to Christine Stansell’s review of the film, “The pace of the film inevitably slackens, and Reds compensates by shifting to the proven dramatic motif of star-crossed lovers separated by the epic of war.”(p.194) The truth as to whether or not this was in reality true or not leaves a lot of doubt in this love story. In many Hollywood films, these certain elements are usually manipulated to coax the audience into certain scripted feelings about the story. Although the Reed and Bryant love affair seems to be exaggerated other events of the film do present some elements of truth. For example, when Jack Reed tries to rally up support for socialist ideas of change amongst factory and wage laborers, the events did in fact take place and were frowned upon by some members of law enforcement, and the upper-class, or the owners and benefiters of the means of production. In addition, one must delve examine the era in which the film was emulating.  

This film takes place during a turbulent time in history. The competing ideas of conservatism, liberalism, and communism were in the minds of many influential men and women during the early years of World War One. The example of Russia and the falling of the Romanov Dynasty and the rise of Bolshevism was the world in which this movie was trying to emulate.  However, the film does posses some funny moments thrown in with a Hollywood twist. In the film, Jack was talking to one of his elderly family members about raising money for his socialist magazine The Masses. In response, the elderly man asked if that were some sort of religious magazine. Truthful, who knows, but it does make for a more entertaining flick. The main point that this film tries to convey is that of change in the form of political and social change. As stated by Rosenstone, “commitment to changing the world through politics is both admirable and very American, but you must change the politics of the personal as well as the politics of the world.”(p.106) This point is exactly what the film shows its audience when Jack rallies around the country in person, and writes about the injustices of the Bourgeoisie against the Proletariat, before moving to Russia to serve the causes of the Communist Party.  According to historian Bonnie Smith, " the Revolution took place in two arenas: one was in the provisional government, composed essentially of moderates; the other was in the factories and in the streets."(149) Reed was shown in the film as trying to catalyze support amongst workers in factories and intellectuals for radical ideas of class unity and the destruction of the ruling class who controlled the means of prodcution in heavily industrialized America during the ealry twentieth century. An interesting and radical idea that eventually led him to become a member of the Communist party in Russia; allowing Reed to honored as being the only American buried in the Kremlin.

This film can be considered a "domestic drama"(102) in the eyes of Rosenstone. This type of film is ususally centered around stories of love and dramatic elements. However, this film also falls into the category of a biography of both Reed's and Bryant's lives and careers. In spite of the term biography, Reds like other Hollywood biographies usually contain more fiction and less reality of actual events and relationships. One could argue that by nature the biography could never be historically accurate, especially in the avenue of film. For example, Reds is over three hours long. Although some parts, such as Jack and Louis reporting on the Bolshevik Revolution in Russia did actually occur, one cannot know for certain the events  and details that actually happened that made up the film. In the case of film, where the audience needs constant visual and cognitive stimulation in order to keep their attention, the realities of what really transpired, if known, are not always synonymous with a predetermined plot. The directors and writers of these biographical "domestic dramas" are not historians. Their professions are based in the arts, and do not share the burden of recreating the past through analytical investigation of the past in its respective context. Therefore, the film, although entertaining, must be judged as a piece of art rather than a piece of history.
Although I categorize biographical domestic-dramas as relating more towards the arts than the field of historical study, other information such as the time when the film was produced adn released can tell us about the historical period and its context. Reds was filmed during 1980's, and the end of the Cold War between the USSR and the United States. Although relations between these two nations were on thin ice the film does not seem to be a reflection of that. In fact, the film could be seen as actually favoring Jack Reed and his visions of politics following in line with  the ideas of Marxism. The film never actually portrays the good aspects of America’s Federal Republic system.This could be the result of the writers and directors wanting to focus more on the romantic love affair of Jack Reed and Louis Bryant than the politics of the times. Seeing how this is an American cast and made film, during the heated Cold War, one could imagine why the film took its path towards drama and romance rather than the usual review of the politics of the time.

The Good Fight

Viva La Quince Brigada-Theme Music

• Film Title: The Good Fight
• Original Year of Production: 1984
• Studio: National Endowment for the Humanities
• Director: Noel Buckner, Mary Dore, Sam Sills
• Cast: Studs Terkel-narrator, Bill Bailey, Ruth Davidow, Salaria Key, Bill Macarthy, Milt Wolf.
• Producers: Noel Buckner, Mary Dore, Sam Sills

The Good Fight: The Abraham Lincoln Brigade in the Spanish Civil War is the documentary of men and women that travelled to Spain to fight Fascism in 1937. These were troubling times in Europe and the United States. America was just recovering from the worst economic depression in its 161 years of independence. Europe and its nations were trying to recover from the First World War while preparing for the next Great War lead by Hitler and his hyper-fascist right-wing idealogy. The Spanish Civil War was a fight for democracy and control of Spain led by General Fransico Franco and other generals against the Spanish Republic. According to Bonnie Smith, "The Spanish government appealed everywhere for assistance, but only the Soviet Union answered.(290) "So instead of massive international support, a few thousand volunteers from a variety of countries-including many students, journalists, and artists", "flocked to Spain to fight for the republic and democracy".(291) The film begins with eleven volunteers and their stories before, during, and after voluntary enlistment. These eleven volunteers are introduced and they explain why they wanted to enlist into this volunteer army. Bill Bailey who served as a seamen, longshoremen and active social activist provided an interesting account of how he and others like him would protest. He first described how he felt for others like him around the world. He described them as his “class brothers”. He goes on to state that he feels connected to men all around the world based on their mutual class. This is where the central theme is first examined by Bill Bailey’s and his description of Fascism in Germany and the abuses against Jews and how Bill empathizes for these poor people. The film thesis is the struggle against Fascism. These men and women were fighting against what they perceived as the fundamentally biased and anti-democratic Fascists in Spain. A slight problem one would have of the film is the oversimplification of the United States neutral stance during the mid-1930s.  This becomes evident after the film mostly examines the views of these volunteers without offering chances to rebuttle by other who did not fight in the Lincoln Brigade. Although there is a narrator, who does explain why America was neutral, there is little empathy expressed from these volunteers for America’s neutral policy during Spain’s Civil War. It becomes evident that this documentary follows more closely the volunteers than the actual events of the Spanish Civil War.

Although the accounts of the war from the volunteers of the Lincoln Brigade appear legitimate and in accord with the harsh fighting of war, the political affiliations of these men and women were possibly associated with Marxist idealogy providing interesting information mostly ignored in the film. According to Robert Rosenstone’s book, History on Film, Film on History, “the International Brigades were organized and directed by the Comintern, and dominated by officials from the Communist Party.” In addition, “at least 70 percent of the Americans were members of either the party or the Young Communist League. (p.81)  These excerpts from Rosenstone's book eludes to the power struggles by different political parties and ideologies during the 30’s. Yet it is interesting how the film makers chose never to identify these volunteers as having ever been members of even influenced by the Communist Party. Possibly the writers and directors of the documentary felt that the message of helping others and fighting fascism would only have been reduced by recognizing the volunteers affiliated with an use of the word Communist. Seeing how this film was released during 1984, which was the year that the USSR and other communist countries boycotted the Olympic Games in Los Angeles, one could imagine how Communism was less than favorable in the eyes of Americans during the Cold War.