So, yesterday, I made my very first The Force Awakens analogy in class. As I am notorious for making Star Wars references in my classroom, my students only knew it was a matter of time before the new movie entered the conversation. Even though the new film hasn't come out, I'm intrigued by a theme TFA trailers are insinuating: true history can be forgotten and/or mythologized [is that a word?]. I can't help but think of how that relates to the history I've read about or experienced, topics from my class, and my own life. Can true history be forgotten? Do we remember what we want to remember? Is it just human nature for the wackier things to stick to history and the mundane gets dropped? Why does today's "very big deal" become tomorrow's afterthought. [Sometimes asking a classroom full of teenagers about John Wayne, Watergate, The Civil War can be frustrating] Can we handle the truth?
Every year, I show my seniors an episode of My So Called Life called "Guns and Gossip?" (aside: what is it with teens and weapons? [ahem, rhetorical question] Rebel Without a Cause, Over the Edge, The Outsiders, A Bronx Tale...check it out) At the very beginning, while watching John F. Kennedy's inaugural speech, Angela laments her parents' generation having that single communal event/moment where everyone remembered where they were. In this case, the event being the Kennedy assassination. She wishes she had something like that. [Be careful what you wish for, Angela] Now, in my lifetime, there was a time when people insisted that The Challenger explosion was our generation's moment. In hindsight, has it matched the impact of November 1963? Should I remember where I was for that event any more than when President Reagan was shot? What about all the positive moments: the Miracle on Ice?
Here's a question, do we believe what we want to believe? Do we want our historical narratives to fit a template? We like good guys vs bad guys, underdogs who overcome adversity, cloned heroes and remakes... [how many "The Next Michael Jordan" or "That person is The Michael Jordan of..." can we create?] What happens when actual events don't fit that model? Why do we get so upset when someone isn't the next Wayne Gretsky, Michael Jordan, John F. Kenndedy, Martin Luther King?... Or the next Empire Strikes Back?
In the mid-90s I worked at an after-school program. The kids ranged in age from 5 to 12. I brought in the three original Star Wars movies (on VHS no less) for them to watch. I was so sure they'd want to watch the original Star Wars, or would like the action in The Empire Strikes Back. You know which movie they wanted to watch? Return of the Jedi? You know why? Ewoks. Now here's my historical context, remember when Return of the Jedi was the punching-bag of the original three films? In the present context of prequel-bashing, did we forget that Return of the Jedi was once the outcast of the OT? I remember my peers referring to it as a muppet movie. People hated, hated the ewoks. Never mind the whole they-couldn't-afford-wookkie-costumes reasoning, or the Vietnam analogy, people couldn't stand the cute little furry guys stealing the spotlight from our oh-so-serious heroes. They couldn't stand the "this-one-is-not-like the-others" glare coming from ROTJ. Yet, so many would argue ROTJ is superior to the PT. You'd think ROTJ was Close Encounters to Empire's Saving Private Ryan, as compared to the prequels' 1941. Personally, I'd say ROTJ is more Hook than Close Encounters...But why ruin everyone's joy in going all Keith Moon in The Phantom Menace Hotel? Is it because those movies didn't fit the template?
The easiest answer to any of these questions can be found in an HBO's ATP (abbreviated). Host Robert Wuhl make a great point that "history is pop culture." Basically, today's media creators are tomorrow's historians. Therefore, we will remember the fiction over the truth because it's more interesting and meaningful, right? The collective oral history in American culture is based on we believe what we choose to believe? Wuhl nicknames this phenomenon the "Liberty Valance Effect" ("When the legend becomes fact, print the legend" - John Ford) What a great way to encapsulate what happens to history over time. The episode has some great examples with Christopher Columbus, Paul Revere and others. The Liberty Valance Effect is the reason why so many history teachers loathe Oliver Stone's JFK. So, how does this circle back to Star Wars and The Force Awakens?
Consider this: is it possible that in TFA, the Liberty Valance Effect works in reverse? What if nobody wants to believe the truth (Luke Skywalker's heroics, the Rebellion vs the evil Empire) because it seems like a myth or fairy tale? That whole good triumphs over evil thing is too easy for a universe that is so ambiguous, complex and gray... What if nobody believes that one quasi-jedi was able to defeat the baddest baddies who ever ruled the universe? On the other hand, what if people grew up to believe [ahem, Finn] the Empire was good and the rebels/jedi were bad? Isn't there evidence to prove that? [I'm looking at you, Mace Windu] What if Luke never told anyone what happened to Vader and Palpatine before the Death Star 2.0 met its demise? What if no one knew that the Luke Skywalker who destroyed the original Death Star also had a hand in defeating Vader and the Emperor? What if everyone believed that Vader and Palpatine died in the destruction of the Death Star 2.0? Does that mean Luke Skywalker becomes a footnote? Is that what TFA trailers are insinuating? Sure sounds interesting and historically relevant to me. Let's wait and see...
Originally Written: December 1, 2015
No comments:
Post a Comment