A review of Ken Burns’ “Benjamin Franklin” (PBS)

Long before I watched this film, I watched another PBS documentary about Benjamin Franklin. This earlier film was by Muffie Meyer, who has made a few documentaries for PBS. These included “Alexander Hamilton,” “Dolley Madison,” and “Liberty! The American Revolution.” The Muffie Meyer film is an excellent film in its own right, which is some three hours long. This Ken Burns film is even longer: some four hours long. But I had low expectations going into this Ken Burns film. That is, Ken Burns’ “Thomas Jefferson” was practically a hatchet job on Mr. Jefferson. Specifically, among other things, it had great emphasis on the hypocrisy of Jefferson’s slaveholding. I actually agree with a number of their criticisms of Jefferson, but still found their take on him to be excessively negative. Thus, I was expecting to get the same kind of treatment in this later film about Benjamin Franklin. And, at first, it seemed like this film would be in the same vein as Ken Burns’ “Thomas Jefferson.” But, surprisingly, I ended up liking “Benjamin Franklin” a lot. I may like Ken Burns’ “Benjamin Franklin” even better than Muffie Meyer’s “Benjamin Franklin.”

A review of Ken Burns’ “Muhammad Ali” (PBS)

He was born Cassius Clay, but joined the Nation of Islam and then changed his name

He was one of the greatest athletes of the twentieth century. He was born “Cassius Marcellus Clay Jr.,” but would later consider that to be his “slave name.” The name had been given to him by his parents, both of whom were African Americans. But the world would instead remember him by another name: “Muhammad Ali,” an Arabic name meaning “blessed of God.” This second name came partially from the seventh-century founder of Islam – that is, after the Prophet Muhammad. But, much closer to home, he had joined the “Nation of Islam” in the United States. This was a Black Muslim group, known for its radical politics. He would be good friends with Malcolm X, but would later abandon his friendship with Malcolm, when Malcolm X later broke with the Nation of Islam. Malcolm disapproved of the more “personal” conduct of Elijah Muhammad, the founder of the American “Nation of Islam.” That is, Elijah Muhammad had impregnated seven of his secretaries. Angry members of the Nation of Islam later murdered Malcolm X as revenge in 1965. Only later in his life would Muhammad Ali express some regret over his earlier break with the controversial Malcolm X.

Cassius Clay and his trainer, 1960

A review of Ken Burns’ “Hemingway” (PBS)

“Writing, at its best, is a lonely life. Organizations for writers palliate the writer's loneliness but I doubt if they improve his writing. He grows in public stature as he sheds his loneliness and often his work deteriorates. For he does his work alone and if he is a good enough writer he must face eternity, or the lack of it, each day.”

– Ernest Hemingway, in his acceptance speech for the 1954 Nobel Prize for Literature

Ken Burns delivers a stellar (and moving) biography of a great American author

Before watching this film, my only experience with Ernest Hemingway was watching the 1996 film “In Love and War,” which dramatizes both his experiences in World War One and his brief romance with Agnes von Kurowsky (played therein by Sandra Bullock). Admittedly, this was a fairly limited acquaintance with the man, and I still haven’t read any of his works. But I knew of his influence, and was willing to try just about any film made by Ken Burns, despite my admitted literary ignorance. I was a great admirer of his earlier film about Mark Twain, despite having a similar ignorance about Mark Twain and his works. Thus, I set out to record my reaction to Ken Burns’ “Hemingway” in this post.

A review of Ken Burns’ “The Congress” (PBS)

“One useless man is a shame, two is a law firm and three or more is a congress.”

– John Adams

It’s hard to do justice to the history of Congress in an hour and a half …

“The Congress” is one of Ken Burns’ lesser-known films, perhaps partially because it was made before he became famous. “The Congress” was made in 1988, two years before his film “The Civil War” came out in 1990. Since “The Congress” is one of his earliest films, it did not have the budget granted to some of his later films (such as his World War II series). Perhaps partly because of this, it was only an hour and a half long. It’s hard to do justice to the history of Congress in an hour and a half, but I will grant that Ken Burns makes a good-faith effort to do so.

A review of Ken Burns’ “Horatio’s Drive: America's First Road Trip”

“♪ He'd have to get under—get out and get under—to fix his little machine
He was just dying to cuddle his queen
But ev'ry minute
When he'd begin it
He'd have to get under—get out and get under—then he'd get back at the wheel ♪

♪ A dozen times they'd start to hug and kiss
And then the darned old engine, it would miss
And then he'd have to get under—get out and get under—and fix up his automobile ♪”

– “He'd Have to Get Under – Get Out and Get Under (to Fix Up His Automobile),” a Vaudeville hit from 1913

Some journeys are epic, and done for “serious” reasons – such as frontier exploration, political diplomacy, and scientific discovery. Other journeys are not serious at all, and are done more on a whim. “Horatio's Drive” was in the latter category. In the summer of 1903, Horatio Nelson Jackson undertook the first cross-country automobile journey across the United States. It turned into a race, whose prize was nothing more than bragging rights. The cars broke down many times along the way, and they had to wait for supplies to arrive by train at times. Horatio Nelson Jackson brought along a mechanic named Sewall K. Crocker, and his pet pit bull Bud. There were also letters to Horatio's wife Bertha Richardson Jackson back at home. For reasons unknown to history, he called her “Swipes.” Tom Hanks acts as the voice of Horatio Nelson Jackson, adding his talents to the film.

Bud, Jackson's pet pit bull

A review of Ken Burns’ “Empire of the Air: The Men Who Made Radio” (PBS)

Sometimes these three men were friends … At other times, they were cutthroat business rivals

The filmmaker Ken Burns became famous when “The Civil War” came out in 1990. At the time I write this, “The Civil War” is still the most popular program ever shown on PBS. But few today know about another program that he later made, which came out in 1992. The film that I refer to is, of course, the film “Empire of the Air: The Men Who Made Radio.” Although the subject is a bit obscure, it’s actually much more interesting than one might assume from this fact. It’s a biography of three different men (all very interesting), who helped to create the industry of radio. They were pioneers in the invention of a new information and entertainment medium. Some of them were even friends and colleagues with each other in earlier years, but some of them were cutthroat business rivals and bitter enemies later on. This film is thus a bit like doing twin biographies of Ulysses S. Grant and Robert E. Lee, as Ken Burns does in “The Civil War.” But with one exception, no one died in this market competition between these three businessmen; although that doesn’t make it any less dramatic. (The person who did die, incidentally, was one of these three men – I shall not say which one – when he jumped out of a New York City window to fall 13 stories to his death. This suicide was brought on by his being beaten at the game of business, and thus driven to some amount of poverty and ruin.)

A review of Ken Burns’ “The Vietnam War” (PBS)

“ ♪ How many roads must a man walk down,
Before they can call him a man?
How many seas must a white dove sail,
Before she sleeps in the sand? ♪

“ ♪ Yes, and how many times must the cannon balls fly,
Before they're forever banned?
The answer, my friend, is blowin' in the wind –
The answer is blowin' in the wind. ♪ ”

– Bob Dylan's “Blowin' in the Wind” (released 1963), an anti-war song not used in this film

Our national debate about the Vietnam War began during the war itself …

Our national debate about the Vietnam War began during the war itself, and continues today in full force. The Ken Burns series is just a relatively recent contributor to this national debate, albeit a very important one. Contrary to popular opinion – and, to some extent, that of this series itself – America actually won most of the battles in that conflict. Nonetheless, it is quite true that we lost the war when we withdrew in 1973, and thus allowed South Vietnam to fall to communism. The doves and the hawks do not really agree on much about this war, but one thing is universally agreed upon: the war was a disaster for the United States and its allies. It caused their prestige to dwindle somewhat abroad, and gave them a reputation for lacking the political will to fight, let alone to stand up to the attempted expansion of communist regimes. (And unlike many other writers, I will not pretend that I have no opinion on this subject; but will admit my partiality up front, honestly and unabashedly.)

A review of Ken Burns’ “Prohibition” (PBS)

“After one year from the ratification of this article the manufacture, sale, or transportation of intoxicating liquors within, the importation thereof into, or the exportation thereof from the United States and all territory subject to the jurisdiction thereof for beverage purposes is hereby prohibited. The Congress and the several States shall have concurrent power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.”

“This article shall be inoperative unless it shall have been ratified as an amendment to the Constitution by the Legislatures of the several States, as provided in the Constitution, within seven years from the date of the submission hereof to the States by the Congress.”

– Eighteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution (ratified 1919), later repealed by the Twenty-First Amendment in 1933

At the time that I write this, I have watched more than 20 documentaries by Ken Burns. These include some of his better-known films (like “The Civil War,” “Baseball,” and “Jazz”), and lesser-known films like “Huey Long,” “Frank Lloyd Wright,” “The Dust Bowl,” and “The Shakers: Hands to Work, Hearts to God” (one of his earliest films). I am a big fan of many of them, but my reaction to his series about Prohibition was somewhat more mixed. As storytelling goes, the film definitely works, since it tells everything from the story of the two amendments that are relevant to this story, to the gang violence of infamous mobsters like Al Capone (whose story makes for great television). I am also fascinated by the “Jazz Age” that was going on concurrently with Prohibition, so I thus love the soundtrack for this film. (It includes both period recordings, and original jazz pieces from Wynton Marsalis and his group.) But I also found this film somewhat biased, since it ignores much evidence that Prohibition was actually working at this time. The traditional telling of Prohibition is that it “didn't work,” and that making alcohol illegal also increases the amount of “crime” associated with it. Ken Burns' telling is decidedly in this tradition, and comes across as anti-Prohibition propaganda, which is not always objective in its conclusions.

A review of Ken Burns’ “Mark Twain” (PBS)

“I was sorry to have my name mentioned as one of the great authors, because they have a sad habit of dying off. Chaucer is dead, Spencer is dead, so is Milton, so is Shakespeare, and I’m not feeling so well myself.”

– Mark Twain, in a “Speech to the Savage Club,” 9 June 1899 (about ten years before his death)

I should give a disclaimer that I’ve never read a single book that Mark Twain wrote. I watched a movie or two based on “The Adventures of Tom Sawyer,” and have often heard of his masterpiece “Huckleberry Finn.” But since I didn’t take Honors English in high school, I was never required to read any of his works (although I have heard bits and pieces of them). But I have often been amused by some of his quips, and have admired the quality of his language despite this. Nonetheless, I don’t claim to be an expert on Mark Twain, and can give only a layperson’s view of this documentary. I shall leave the literary criticism to reviewers more qualified to engage in it.

A review of Ken Burns’ “Jackie Robinson” (PBS)

“ ♪ Did you see Jackie Robinson hit that ball?
It went zoomin 'cross the left field wall.
Yeah boy, yes, yes. Jackie hits that ball. ♪

♪ And when he swung his bat,
the crowd went wild,
because he knocked that ball a solid mile.
Yeah boy, yes, yes. Jackie hits that ball. ♪ ”

– Buddy Johnson's “Did You See Jackie Robinson Hit That Ball?” (1949), with a famous recording by Count Basie in that same year

Before Jackie Robinson, baseball was segregated, with the Black players in a separate league

It has been said that baseball is a profoundly conservative game, which sometimes managed to be years ahead of its time. That is certainly the case with Jackie Robinson; since long before the civil rights movement of the 1960's, Jackie Robinson broke the “color barrier” in 1947. He was the first African American ever to play in the Major Leagues on a permanent basis. There were actually a few African Americans who had played in the Major Leagues before him, and who had been “light-skinned” enough that they could almost pass for “White.” But when their racial background was discovered, they were unfortunately kicked out of Major League Baseball for this reason. Before Jackie Robinson, African Americans were thus forced to play in a segregated set of leagues known as the “Negro Leagues.” (The term “Negro” was considered non-offensive at this time.) It was only after Jackie Robinson permanently broke the color barrier in 1947 that baseball was finally integrated.

Robinson with the Brooklyn Dodgers in 1954

A review of Ken Burns’ “Baseball” (PBS)

“♪ Katie Casey was baseball mad,
Had the fever and had it bad.
Just to root for the home town crew,
Ev'ry sou
Katie blew. ♪

♪ On a Saturday her young beau
Called to see if she'd like to go
To see a show, but Miss Kate said 'No,
I'll tell you what you can do:' ♪ ”

– The unknown first verse of “Take Me Out to the Ballgame” (1908)

When Ken Burns' “The Civil War” came out in 1990, it was the most popular program in PBS history; and it still holds that record today. This program received significant critical acclaim, and it certainly deserved this acclaim. But when Ken Burns was asked what he was going to do next, he was met with raised eyebrows when he said “baseball.” For many people, baseball seems like something less than a “serious” historical topic; and probably seemed like a waste of Ken Burns' talent to boot. But to me, this is no “anticlimax” – this is a legitimate historical topic in its own right. You can learn a lot about the history of America by studying the history of its baseball, I think – at least, for the periods after baseball was invented. I will return to this theme multiple times in this post, as I give some related anecdotes from baseball history. Suffice it to say for now that it gives some great insights into this country; and that if you really want to understand America, you would do well to study this game in detail.

National League Baltimore Orioles, 1896

Christy Mathewson, known as “The Christian Gentleman”

A review of Ken Burns’ “Jazz” (PBS series)

"Jazz is the assassination, the murdering, the slaying of syncopation. I would even go so far as to confess that we are musical anarchists."

- Nick La Rocca, leader of the first jazz band to make a record

An opinion from a longtime fan and (amateur) musician ...

I should preface this review by saying that I am a longtime fan of jazz music, as well as a longtime fan of both history and the Ken Burns documentaries about it. I freely acknowledge that I am not an expert on music history (jazz or otherwise), and do not consider myself to be a true musician - much as I would like to call myself by this distinguished title. I have played piano for a long time, it is true, and I have played jazz (and other styles) by ear. But I am neither a professional musician nor particularly talented in my performance, and consider myself only an enthusiastic fan with a sometime musical hobby. That being said, I am entitled to my opinion about it as much as anyone else, and so offer this review to any who might enjoy it.

A review of PBS’s “Not for Ourselves Alone: The Story of Elizabeth Cady Stanton and Susan B. Anthony”

"Representatives shall be apportioned among the several States according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each State, excluding Indians not taxed. But when the right to vote at any election for the choice of Electors for President and Vice-President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, the executive and judicial officers of a State, or the members of the legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such State, being twenty-one years of age, and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such State."

- Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution (ratified 1868), Section 2 - a major barrier to the enactment of women's suffrage before the passage of the Nineteenth Amendment, because of the word "male"

I had a sort of request from one of my female readers to do something about women's history. Up until that point, I had thought that women would not like hearing things about women's history coming from a man (such as myself); but considered at that point that women might also dislike the idea of their history being left out - which is not a fair perception for my particular blog, I might suggest (since I have talked about it indirectly, in posts about other things), but one that might be perceived nonetheless on the part of some women, if I didn't actually go out and write something specifically on women's history. Thinking "darned if I do, darned if I don't" (or something along those lines), I thought "What the heck?", and decided to write about women's history after all. (If you don't like the idea of women's history written by a man, then by all means, don't read this; but if you're not bothered by the masculine coverage of feminine history, then you're entirely welcome to read this post.)

Elizabeth Cady Stanton and Susan B. Anthony: The central figures of this documentary

Thus, I set out to write a post about two of the great feminists of the women's suffrage movement, which are Elizabeth Cady Stanton and Susan B. Anthony. These were both depicted in a Ken Burns film called "Not for Ourselves Alone: The Story of Elizabeth Cady Stanton and Susan B. Anthony" (which was later broadcast on PBS). I imagine that Ken Burns and writer Geoffrey C. Ward (both men) also found themselves in the same uncomfortable position that I described for myself, which may have been why they dedicated this film to their daughters, and the other women in their lives. In that same spirit, I set out to give my review of this film; perhaps one that will be read by my future children and other descendants - which will likely include females, who will wonder what I said about their gender's history; and who I cannot let myself disappoint in my coverage here.

Elizabeth Cady Stanton with her two sons, 1848

Susan B. Anthony, 1848

A review of Ken Burns’ “The West”

"Nevada Territory is fabulously rich in gold, silver, lead, coal, iron, quicksilver... thieves, murderers, desperadoes ... lawyers, Christians, Indians, [Chinese], Spaniards, gamblers, sharpers, coyotes, poets, preachers and jackass rabbits."

- Samuel Clemens, who would later become known as "Mark Twain"

I have had a strong love-hate relationship with Ken Burns' "The West" ever since I first saw it, perhaps having more mixed feelings about it than any other documentary that I've ever seen. There is so much good in it, and there is so much bad in it. I sometimes remember parts of it fondly when coming into contact with the history that it covers, but I also remember an overall negative impression that I received from much of the series. This is one of those series where political correctness is taken to levels that are a bit on the extreme side, which is strong enough to detract from the quality of some parts of it. Some parts of it are also quite good, which makes it hard for me to reject it outright; but my overall impression of this series has been generally negative since first watching it. It has much of value in it, but my memory of this series has tended to be negative.

Hernán Cortés

A review of “Unforgivable Blackness: The Rise and Fall of Jack Johnson”

"Boxing has fallen into disfavor ... The reason is clear: Jack Johnson ... has out-sparred an Irishman. He did it with little brutality, the utmost fairness and great good nature. He did not 'knock' his opponent senseless ... Neither he nor his race invented prize fighting or particularly like it. Why then this thrill of national disgust? Because Johnson is black. Of course some pretend to object to Johnson's character. But we have yet to hear, in the case of White America, that marital troubles have disqualified prize fighters or ball players or even statesmen. It comes down, then, after all to this unforgivable blackness."

- W. E. B. Du Bois, in "The Crisis" (1914), with emphasis added

One of the most important figures in black history was a civil rights leader named W. E. B. Du Bois. He was one of the co-founders of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP); and had the duty of editing their monthly magazine, which was a publication entitled "The Crisis."

W. E. B. Du Bois

Where does the unusual title of the documentary come from?

He wrote in "The Crisis" once in 1914 about an African American boxer named Jack Johnson, who was the first person of this background to become boxing's "Heavyweight Champion of the World." Here is the quote that the title of this Ken Burns film comes from:

W. E. B. Du Bois

It comes from a quote by a civil rights leader named W. E. B. Du Bois, which is as follows:

"Boxing has fallen into disfavor ... The reason is clear: Jack Johnson ... has out-sparred an Irishman. He did it with little brutality, the utmost fairness and great good nature. He did not 'knock' his opponent senseless ... Neither he nor his race invented prize fighting or particularly like it. Why then this thrill of national disgust? Because Johnson is black. Of course some pretend to object to Johnson's character. But we have yet to hear, in the case of White America, that marital troubles have disqualified prize fighters or ball players or even statesmen. It comes down, then, after all to this unforgivable blackness." - W. E. B. Du Bois, in "The Crisis" (1914), with emphasis added

Jack Johnson

The film's title is thus easy to misconstrue as pro-racist (when, in fact, it is the opposite)

With the background established for the title of this film - which is easy to misconstrue, when taken out of context - I will now launch into my review of this film, and talk about this important person from the history of Black America.

A review of Ken Burns’ “Thomas Jefferson” (PBS)

"We hold these truths to be self-evident: That all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness ... "

- The Declaration of Independence (July 4, 1776), written by Thomas Jefferson

PBS's biography of Thomas Jefferson was the first Ken Burns biography I saw. I had seen some of his non-biographical things (like "The Civil War"), but I had never yet seen one of his biographies. After having watched virtually all of Ken Burns' films (many are available on Netflix), I still think that this is one of his best biographies; although I greatly admire his films about Benjamin Franklin and Mark Twain as well. I've seen a lot of other presidential biographies by other filmmakers, and I think this one is among the best I've seen.

Somewhat ironically, though, there isn't much focus on his presidency. That's not to say that his presidency is ignored here, but most of the film is about other parts of his life. This may actually be appropriate, though, because the presidency is not really the most important part of Jefferson's life. For most presidents, their administration stands front and center in the discussion of their legacy; but for Thomas Jefferson, he didn't even put his administration among his three most important accomplishments, which were the ones that he had listed on his gravestone. The first-listed was a piece of parchment he wrote in 1776 - a much-celebrated document that is none other than our Declaration of Independence. He was the chief author of this document, and I agree with him when he says that this, rather than his presidency, was his most important accomplishment.

John Trumbull's Declaration of Independence

A review of Ken Burns’ “The Civil War” (PBS series)

"Fondly do we hope, fervently do we pray, that this mighty scourge of war may speedily pass away. Yet, if God wills that it continue until all the wealth piled by the bondsman's two hundred and fifty years of unrequited toil shall be sunk, and until every drop of blood drawn with the lash shall be paid by another drawn with the sword, as was said three thousand years ago, so still must it be said that 'the judgments of the Lord are true and righteous altogether.' "

- Abraham Lincoln's Second Inaugural Address (March 4, 1865)

It was the bloodiest war in American history, with more American dead than World War II. It was a war that both sides thought would last ninety days, but which ended up dragging on for nearly four years. And it was a war that freed four million Americans from bondage, and brought some sweeping changes to American society.

Confederate dead at Antietam

A review of Ken Burns’ “The War” (World War Two series)

"The German Government, consequently, discontinues diplomatic relations with the United States of America and declares that under these circumstances brought about by President Roosevelt Germany too, as from today, considers herself as being in a state of war with the United States of America."

- German Declaration of War with the United States (11 December 1941), four days after Pearl Harbor

With a great subject and the superb direction of Ken Burns, you'd think PBS's "The War" would be one of my favorite documentaries. I'm a big fan of several Ken Burns films (especially "The Civil War"), and I have loved many documentaries about World War II (especially "The World at War"). And it is true that I like this documentary; but it isn't one of my favorites. The focus that it chooses is both a strength and a weakness; and for someone like me, it's mainly a weakness.

Limiting the story to Americans has its weaknesses at times ...

What is the focus that I talk about? Mainly, it's the fact that World War II is told through the eyes of four American towns. It's a brilliant depiction of life in these four places; and in a broader sense, life in wartime America generally. Yet it is also the weakness of this documentary - limited in its geographic area, they have fewer interviewees to choose from; and not all of them are equally interesting. More importantly, the documentary focuses entirely on America; and shies away from depicting anything outside of it - whether that be from our allies (mainly the British Commonwealth and the Soviet Union), or from our enemies (mainly Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan). It would be as if he did "The Civil War" from only the point of view of the North. Yes, that point of view is important (and ultimately the right one); but the war is not understood from an exclusive focus on either side. You have to depict both sides to get a true understanding of the war.

Japanese army enters Nanking, 1937

My favorite Western film (Lewis and Clark)

I have seen a lot of great Westerns, but my favorite in the genre is not a Hollywood film at all, but a four-hour Ken Burns documentary called "Lewis and Clark: The Journey of the Corps of Discovery."