American history, Spielberg-style — am I right to be wary?

I’ll state up front that I haven’t seen Lincoln yet, but my instincts have been telling me that something is rotten in the absolute acclaim the film has been winning. Steven Spielberg is a nice director, but I have difficulty taking him seriously as an intellectual one.

I love Raiders of the Lost Ark. E.T. was fabulous. Ditto Close Encounters. But there was something too easy about his major intellectual and supposedly serious works, Schindler’s List and Saving Private Ryan, movies that do their best to add an odd bit of gloss to what should have been far grittier films and whitewash any emotional or moral gray areas. Those two films — which were overly long and sanctimonious — can be summed up way too easily: patriotism and brotherhood is good (Private Ryan) and Nazis are bad (Schindler’s List, when you think about it, was just a serious retake on Raiders and not nearly as riveting).

Now we have Spielberg telling the story of the 13th Amendment — with help from the usually

Am I just being contrary? Am I just out of touch? Or is Tom Frank right when he calls the film a middlebrow apology for the false prophet (or is it profit?) of bipartisanism, horse-trading and compromise that takes as its chief target principled reformers?

I tend to agree with Frank on most things, just as I tend to agree with Matt Rothschild of The Progressive (full disclosure: he is my editor when I have written for the magazine and its op-ed project), who also has offered a pretty tart takedown of the film.

But I want to be openminded. For those of you who have loved the film, tell me why. And while you’re at it, explain why bipartisan compromise — which has brought us such important achievements as the original Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell rule, welfare reform, No Child Left Behind, sequestration, the PATRIOT Act, and a health-care reform bill without a public option but plenty of money for the insurance and drug companies — is the cure for what ails us as a nation.

Unknown's avatar

Author: hankkalet

Hank Kalet is a poet and freelance journalist. He is the economic needs reporter for NJ Spotlight, teaches journalism at Rutgers University and writing at Middlesex County College and Brookdale Community College. He writes a semi-monthly column for the Progressive Populist. He is a lifelong fan of the New York Mets and New York Knicks, drinks too much coffee and attends as many Bruce Springsteen concerts as his meager finances will allow. He lives in South Brunswick with his wife Annie.

One thought on “American history, Spielberg-style — am I right to be wary?”

  1. I haven't seen the movie yet and I'd like to. Perhaps with you, if you'd like.As for bipartisan compromise, those who think it a good unto itself are wrong. Effective and principled governance requires it, but only after moving public opinion as far as one can first, and then only if the achievable outcome will do enough good to outweigh whatever interruption it may cause in the push to do better in the future. Sometimes, half-measures actually increase forward momentum, sometimes the don't, but are worth it anyway.

Leave a comment