In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

commercial docudramas on early American history, Roanoak raises important historical issues and is worthy of careful classroom analysis, especially if used in conjunction with some of the primary sources which are readily available. David Quninn and Alison Quinn, The First Colonists (available from the North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources for $6.95) includes all of the central Roanoke documents. Another important resource is America 1585: The Complete Drawings ofJohn White (University of North Carolina Press, 1984), $25. Finally, Dover books has published a facsimile edition of Thomas Hariot's A Briefe and True Report ofthe Newfound Land of Virginia, ($6) with the woodcut versions through which White's paintings were known for over three hundred years. An interesting comparison is possible between the original paintings and the somewhat altered woodcuts made by a German engraver named Theodore DeBry in 1 590. Students might be further challenged to compare these contemporary views with the video representations ofRoanoak. Karen Ordahl Kupperman University of Connecticut Film Review GEORGE WASHINGTON: The Forging of a New Nation aired on the CBS network on September 21 and 22, 1986. This piece first appeared as a Film & History FLASHREVIEWon September 16, 1986. Following up its eight hour GEORGE WASHINGTON series, broadcast in 1984, CBS has filmed a sequel, using some of the same stars, which focuses on Washington's presidential administration. It has some of the virtues and, unfortunately, some of the faults ofits predecessor. Let me talk about the virtues first. This is a lavishly done production which flows easily from event to event and avoids any gratuitous anachronisms in the physical settings. The scenes of mob violence in Philadelphia and the army musters during the suppression of the Whiskey Rebellion suffer from no shortage of extras. Granted, the 1 8th century presented here is a prettied up, Williamsburg sort ofpast, but given what viewers expect of television, it is not badly done. Seeing it, I resolved to visit New Castle, Delaware soon. Philadelphia and Mount Vernon were also used as settings for the production. But, there is not much more to be praised. Since the production apparently aspires to be both biography and history, I will speak of it from both of those perspectives. The people presented here, from the title character on down, are caricatures of what biographers generally understand them to have been. Washington, whose grave, formal facade kept just about everyone at a distance, is here portrayed going about shaking hands, giving fatherly advice to "Alex" Hamilton, sparring verbally with a Philadelphia society matron who coyly asks him if it is not true that he is known as "the Stallion ofthe Potomac," briefly, acting much the way a television script writer might have wanted him to act and not the way "His Excellency, President Washington" went about his duties. The portrayal of the other characters does not rise much above this, with the minister from the Republic of France, "Citizen" Edmond Genet presented as a stage Frenchman. About the only character who seemed at all authentic was Secretary of War Henry Knox who, unfortunately, played a minor role in the administration. The dialogue probably had an effect here, as it rarely rises above the trite. 84 Nor does the production play well on the level of history. Minor inaccuracies abound; for example, Washington was commonly addressed and referred to as "Excellency," not "Mr. President" as is used throughout the show. Using the correct title might have given an idea ofthe vice-regal air ofthe ceremonial life of the administration and some notion that Jefferson and Madison were not erecting straw men when they feared that the new government might slip into monarchy. More important, Washington is depicted as taking Hamilton and Jefferson out fishing and keeping them on the water until they agreed to the residence/assumption bargain wherein Southern votes for the assumption of state debts were swapped for a Southern location for the capital. This untrue and involving Washington even indirectly in the bargain is a serious distortion of the view he had ofthe presidential office and the way in which he actually executed it. Of greater significance than the treatment of individuals' actions, however, is the overall interpretation...

pdf

Share