Historical Truth
An Interview with Ken Burns
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 23215318 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Thomas Cripps (corresponding author) |
| Year | 1995 |
| Volume | 100 |
| Issue | 3 |
| Pages | 741 |
| Publication date | 1995-06-01 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | No |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | The American Historical Review (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0002-8762 • E-ISSN: 1937-5239 |
| Publisher | JSTOR (PUBLISHER) |
| DOI | 10.2307/2168603 |
| OpenAlex | W2065058774 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 4 |
Over a year and a half ago, the editor of the AHR extended an invitation to Ken Burns to write an essay for the centennial issue of the journal. Burns was asked to discuss the changing nature of historical truth during the course of the century following the first issue of the AHR. When the press of his film work prevented Burns from contributing an original piece of writing, he agreed to be interviewed, and David Ransel sought my services as the interviewer. After a brief negotiation by telephone, we agreed to meet in the afternoon of November 17, 1995, at the Wurst Haus in Harvard Square, from which it was an easy walk to the Afro-American Studies Department of Harvard University, in whose departmental library the interview took place. The cassette-recorded conversation took most of an afternoon, during which Burns allowed far more time than originally promised. The recording was transcribed by the staff of the AHR in Bloomington, Indiana, and a copy sent to Burns's staff. Ken Burns confesses to an almost devout fondness for American history, a love that, coupled with his thorough research on film projects, justifies his proud claim to the status of historian. A mature man of youthful appearance, Burns seems to relish the role of provocateur of the academic establishment. Yet he is quick to point out the deep trust and reliance he places in the professional historians who sit on his boards of advisers. It is this combination of faith and skepticism from which his sense of historical truth springs. While he admires and trusts the intellectual achievement of academic historians, he criticizes them for having abandoned their role as tribal storytellers who craft tales about the past in which the nation can find its identity. The gulf between these two attitudes toward the profession of historian defines the difference between two kinds of historical truth. Burns's own sense of mission as storyteller is associated with his ideas about the accomplishments of documentary film. Parallel to a century-long professionalization of history, the documentary film has grown from generations of dull travel film and educational films, leavened only by a few heroic accomplishments such as Robert Flaherty's Nanook of the North, Pare Lorentz's Plow That Broke the Plains, and William Wellman's Oscar-winning The Memphis Belle. Burns's sense of the past thus derives from two sources: his own sense of self as amateur historian as well as a sense that documentary film is at the height of its powers. The resulting sensibility and achievement has given him an audience that few historians who work in the printed word will ever reach. As producer, director
Art history · Centennial · Conversation · Faith · Media studies · Negotiation · Political science · Skepticism · Sociology · Theology · Cuban History and Society · History · Law · Philosophy · Race, History, and American Society
| Unique citing works | 4 |
|---|---|
| Citations per year | 0,17 |
| Citation span | 2003 - 2021 (19) |
| Citation velocity | historical |
| Highly cited | No |
| Citation types | Neutral: 2 |