The article called Am I a camera focuses on the issue of putting history on film. The main goal of this paper is to present the author’s main idea, and all the facts his work represents. In order to achieve this goal, it is needed to provide all the evidence properly, and to remain faithful to the text.
In this article, David Herlihy argues mainly about the issues of presenting history with the help of films. The author carefully describes the main aspects of the films, which present historical events and characters. He provides the information about the techniques of those films, what is required for making those films, and the ways of how those films represent the historical events. The structure of the article makes it be very understandable, David Herlihy uses pieces of evidence in order to support his point of view.
Then, the author tries to find out whether films can be helpful in presenting the history to people. In order to reveal this issue, the author uses the essay by Professor Rosenstone as the example. Rosenstone states that the main problem of the profession is that it lacks imagination in developing visual history. This term can be defined as the presentation of the historical themes both in images and words, but not only in words. The combination of words and images enlivens the past. This statement is absolutely right, because it is much easier for the individual to perceive the history with the help of such a combination.
In order to make the viewer an eyewitness of the historical events, the historical film must show more information about the past events than the makers of the film could ever know. Historical films must include objects, which are aimed at maintaining the illusion of the reality. However, it is very difficult to choose those objects for the events, which occurred in the centuries before recent past. In this case, the makers of the film must use their imagination. Historical films require thick descriptions, which the majority of historical records cannot provide. That’s why the filmmakers are not able to fully depict the historic reality. The author also states that in order to make the viewer an eyewitness of the past events, the historical films must lock this viewer in the present. The viewer must observe only what is before the lens. The historical films must use only the present tense in order to make the viewer feel himself to be an eyewitness of the events, which are depicted. Moreover, historical films may also use the lectures, which instruct the viewer about different objects and events, which are depicted.
Then the author states that the historical films cannot replicate the unique scenes of the history with full precision, some details and internal motives must remain opaque to the film media. The films are very good in representing the visual styles of the past, and such values cannot be expressed in written words. In order to support his assertion, the author uses the film called The Return of Martin Guerre as the example. Herlihy states that a lot of scenes from this film were inspired by modern artistic styles, but with regard to historic authenticity.
As the conclusion, the author states that it is necessary to encourage all the sources, which can awaken interest in history among people. Film can be considered to be one of these sources. However, it is needed to remember that a film cannot be recognized as independent statements of the past events. People must know that films are illusions and they should be perceived as such. The historical films answer must answer for the messages, which they convey, and must be carried out by a critical commentary. Moreover, it is necessary to remember that the historical films are very effective at awaking interest in people, and such films are very useful in presenting the history.
Bibliography
Harris, Joe. Rewriting: How To Do Things With Texts. Utah State University Press, 2006.
Herlihy, David. "Am I A Camera? Other Reflections On Films And History". The American Historical Review 93, no. 5 (1998): 1186-1192.
