Sparks Commentary: A review of PBS’s “The White House: Inside Story”

“Decision, activity, secrecy, and dispatch will generally characterize the proceedings of one man [such as a president] in a much more eminent degree than the proceedings of any greater number; and in proportion as the number is increased, these qualities will be diminished.”

– Alexander Hamilton, in the Federalist Papers (Federalist No. 70)

We hear a lot about the “big historical events” of the American presidency. And, to some extent, this is as it should be – some events may just be more worthy of frequent mention than others. But what about day-to-day life at the White House, in either the past or the present? And what about the architectural history of the White House building itself? These are some of the questions that this program attempts to answer, in its brief two-hour runtime. This program was made in 2016, when Barack Obama was still president. (He left office on January 20th, 2017.) And, fortunately for the filmmakers, President Obama was very cooperative with them in allowing them to film various parts of the White House. As the filmmakers note in this film, thousands of people still tour the White House on a typical day, seeing rooms that are actually used for official state functions. That is, they don’t just see “show rooms,” but actual buildings that are regularly used for Washington business. They may see a dining room where a state dinner was recently held, or the Oval Office where the president does much of his business. In some ways, the White House is similar to a palace, which is on loan to whoever currently holds the office. But, if so, it’s a very democratic palace, full of American history stretching back to the country’s founding.

The White House after the fire of 1814

Early years of the White House, including the original construction of the building

When our first president (George Washington) took office in 1789, the capitol of the United States was still in New York City. It soon moved back to its former location in Philadelphia. But, in 1790, the capital was permanently moved to its current location: Washington, D.C. This is the city that today bears Mr. Washington’s name. And it was during the George Washington administration that construction began on the White House building. It was only completed in 1800, meaning that our second president (John Adams) was our first president to actually live in that building. The White House was partially destroyed by the British in 1814, during our “War of 1812” – which actually lasted until 1815, incidentally. The First Lady at that time was Dolley Madison, who (thankfully) saved an important painting of George Washington from being destroyed. This was at some risk to herself. After the war, the White House was then restored to some of its former glory. This film occasionally mentions some other pre-twentieth-century presidents. Most prominently, they mention Abraham Lincoln. Of course, his Civil War tenure would be somewhat turbulent, with Confederate troops just across the Potomac from the Lincoln White House. The Confederate capitol of Richmond was less than a hundred miles away from Washington. But, for the most part, this program’s focus is much more modern. In part, this is because this program interviews many surviving family members of the recent presidents. The earliest of the presidents with any family members to be interviewed here is LBJ. They also interview Jimmy Carter, Rosalynn Carter, one of Gerald Ford’s daughters, George W. Bush’s daughters, and the two Bush First Ladies. The highest density of interviews is with Barack and Michelle Obama, who were still living there at the time. Fortunately (again), they were fairly cooperative with the filmmakers, giving much access to various rooms in the White House. Historical photographs and footage are also used to great effect here, particularly for presidents since FDR.

The White House during the Civil War

A focus on day-to-day life at the White House, rather than on major historical events

Some major historical events are mentioned herein, such as Pearl Harbor and 9/11. During the 9/11 terrorist attacks, some believe that the hijacked “Flight 93” was intended to be flown into the White House itself. Thankfully, though, the passengers of that flight fought back, and prevented anyone outside the plane from being killed by its ultimate crash into the soil of Pennsylvania. Obviously, if the plane had instead crashed into the White House, this would have caused some slight changes to the building’s architecture. This is why they spend some time on the major historical event of 9/11. But most of this program actually focuses on day-to-day life at the White House itself, rather than on these major historical events. This goes from the kitchens used to prepare state dinners, to the ubiquitous presence of Secret Service agents and United States Marines. There is also the more limited (but still important) presence of various reporters from the White House press corps. The first televised press conferences came during the Eisenhower administration, when television was still quite new. They were reinvented by JFK, although the press’s presence was subsequently curtailed somewhat by President Richard Nixon. These limits upon the press’s building access were very influential on subsequent administrations. This program interviews White House staff members from the then-current Obama administration, some of whom had worked for previous presidents – regardless of political affiliations. Since Washington, D.C. has long had a large African American population, Blacks have long been well-represented among the White House staff. In the old days, slavery was still legal in Washington, D.C., so many presidents brought their own slaves with them into the White House. After the 1865 abolition of slavery, though, the local Black population still sought the relatively-good jobs in the White House, as they have ever since. That is, these jobs were now voluntary.

The Red Room, as designed during the Kennedy administration

Changes in the architecture, with comments on the First Ladies interviewed here

Things before the Lyndon Johnson administration are seldom mentioned, although occasional exceptions are made in this program. For example, this film talks about how children and teenagers were raised in the White House, and how the weddings of grown presidential children were sometimes performed there. However, they also talk (somewhat, at least) about changes in the architecture. The White House building became structurally unsound during the Harry Truman administration. When Harry Truman’s daughter was playing the piano on the second floor, she was horrified when the floor collapsed, and one of the piano’s legs crashed through the floor of her sitting room. It went through the ceiling of the family dining room below. Thankfully, no one was hurt in that incident. But Congress gave the funds to reconstruct the building, offering to erect an entirely new building in its place. But, thankfully, Harry Truman insisted on retaining the prior architecture as much as possible, and used the funds to update the currently-existing structure instead. This was authorized, and exactly what he should have done. Jackie Kennedy also tried to give the building more of a sense of history, and gave the building a salutary makeover during her husband’s tenure there. Again, the architectural history is disproportionately focused on relatively modern things. This is my main criticism of the film. The film is also a bit journalistic in style, although it usually manages to transcend this limitation. The biggest omission of this film is Ronald Reagan, whose family members are not interviewed here. I suspect that Nancy Reagan might have refused consent to be interviewed, although (again) Barbara and Laura Bush both consented to be interviewed in this film. If there’s a political bias, it’s a fairly mild one, since no hostile questions are asked of people on either side. The filmmakers are much more interested in the White House itself, and giving a profile of everyday life therein. The disproportionate focus on the Obamas probably comes from their being the then-current occupants of the White House when this film was made. Nonetheless, they are sure to highlight the Obamas’ famous charisma in their segments there. Even their critics usually concede that the Obamas have extraordinary charisma.

The Cross Hall of the White House

Conclusion: This film is good for what it is, even if somewhat haphazard in its organization

One can’t really go into much depth on anything in a two-hour film. And, again, their focus is divided somewhat between a profile of day-to-day life therein, and the architectural history of the building itself. When watching this film, it’s sometimes hard to tell how this program was supposed to be organized, as the transitions almost seem a bit random at times. I wouldn’t necessarily say that it was “disorganized,” but its organization sometimes seems a bit haphazard. But this is a good primer on what life is (and was) like for the relatively recent presidents – as well as a few earlier ones. Constitutional analysis of the president’s powers (and their limits) will have to be found elsewhere – perhaps in some of the constitutional posts, to which I shall link below. But this is a decent introduction to the magnificent White House building, and the day-to-day operations of the American presidency.

“For as in absolute governments the King is law, so in free countries the law ought to be King; and there ought to be no other.”

– Thomas Paine’s “Common Sense” (1776), Chapter III

*****

Disclosure: I am an Amazon affiliate marketer, and can sometimes make money when you buy the product using the link(s) above.

DVD at Amazon

If you liked this post, you might also like:

A review of Ken Burns’ “The Congress” (with brief history of the Capitol building)

What’s the difference between the presidency and the prior British monarchy?

“How many presidents have we had?” (Depends on how you count Cleveland and Trump)

An overview of the American presidency and its powers

5 limits on presidential power that you never heard of

Why people will always find the executive branch more interesting than the other two branches