There has often been much discussion as to how certain texts portray historical events in relation to the present. Different texts such as literature and film often use dominant historical information in which to portray a particular story. There are often issues occurring when placing them within the periods they apparently depict. In order to consider these issues we need to not only investigate the portrayal of history in fiction, but also the assertions of history in general. The biopic film is often centred on a particular historical figure and it is through analysis of two recent films J. Edgar (2011) and The Iron Lady (2011) in relation to concepts of history we shall now turn.
When considering historical accuracy within a particular film, attention is often ignored to the particular failures and contradictions of the practice. Hayden White discusses in The Historical Text as a Literary Artifact that “how a given historical situation is to be configured depends on the historian’s subtlety in matching up a specific plot structure with the set of historical events that he wishes to endow with a meaning of a particular kind” (2002, p195). This means that the historian will take certain historical facts and fit them into a particular narrative in order for the reader to understand a period of history. The problem is that the narrative is paradoxically fictional due to the historian’s assumptions and creation of plot structure. Another issue with the historical method is that when applying a certain structure, the historian will ignore certain facts over prevailing facts that fit the meaning of his plot structure. White argues that “it is in this brutal capacity to exclude certain facts in the interest of constituting others as components of comprehensible stories that the historian displays his tact as well as his understanding” (White, 2002, p200-201). This means when considering any historical narrative, particular attention needs to also be paid to the omission of certain facts.
The films J. Edgar (2011) and The Iron Lady (2011) both concentrate on powerful figures that have dominated western society. When considering their plot structure in relation to White’s assertions, the two films portray a similar approach. They both depict the private lives of the central figures and develop their particular character traits throughout. This often softens the actual effect their particular decisions and actions had on the wider society. In J. Edgar (2011) the film concentrates on the notorious life of former Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation J. Edgar Hoover. The plot structure depicts his rise to power and fame in the FBI, although its main concentration is on the private relationships between him, his mother and partner Clyde Tolson. The film often races through the different eras in which he held power over the FBI, whilst the focus is on the humanising of his personality through the struggle against his homophobic mother. This means that certain factual information has been removed in order to fit the plot structure. One example of events omitted from the film is his anti-communist activities during the McCarthy era, in which many suspected radicals were subjugated and working immigrants exiled. The most famous of these was Charlie Chaplin, whose films were determined as “communist propaganda” (Sbardellati & Shaw, 2003, p495). The historical information it does concentrate on however, shows a certain progression of society, such as the adoption of the scientific method of investigation and correlation of data on criminals in the FBI.
The Iron Lady (2011) similarly concentrates more on the private life of Ex-British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher. Similar to J. Edgar (2011) it races through the different periods in her life, including montages of political unrest during her time as Prime Minister. There is little or no characterisation of any political opponents/protesters within the film and its plot structure focuses on her time within the Conservative Party. The film depicts her as a lone female politician competing against the male dominated Conservative Party and establishment. One example of historical information omitted from the film is the demonstration in Wapping against the move of News Corporation owned by Rupert Murdoch, in which Thatcher played a significant role (Belfield, Hird & Kelly, 1991, p99). It would again seem that this information would not fit the narrative plot structure of the film. There is also the same sense of progression as seen in J. Edgar (2011) with her neo-liberalist economics apparently saving Britain from the threat of bankruptcy. The problem is that both these films depict the figures as powerful, but subjugated or repressed individuals who overcome obstacles and despite any criticism; they succeed in making their nation what it is today. This relates to how the films try to ascertain their position in history by considering a state of progression when compared with contemporary society.
The issues with the validity of historical films are usually more explicit than their academic counterpart. They need to “dress-up” the historical epoch in which they depict, in order to create an apparent sense of realism. Pam Cook argues in her article Lure of the Past: Reinventing History that the “the contradictory nature of the historical film, the tendency of costume and period display to appear as masquerade, brings it uncomfortably close to presenting history as fabrication” (1996, p68). This means that the dominant ideas in history often become clichés with historical films as the figures are literally masquerading contemporary society. This is particularly evident in the biopic film as it tries to display and reinvent particular individual’s identity. Indeed in The Iron Lady (2011) the film concentrates on the forming of her particular personality and identity. In the film we get a portrayal of how her identity (and authoritative voice) is shaped by other politicians in the party such as Edward Neave. This means that the audience become involved with the development on current dominant ideas of her personality. Another issue with the dressing up of film is that “the historical film both reflects prevailing social conditions and contributes to the current ideas about history” (Cook, 1996, p68). This is prevalent when we are inundated with certain dialogue within the film that can specifically determine the producer’s attention to the present. In one scene Thatcher insists that “if we don’t cut spending we will be bankrupt” in relation to Britain’s economy during the early 1980s. The following scenes show the economy in an apparent boom after the short depiction of dissent on the street from protesters. This can show particular attention to the current economic crisis in contemporary society and it can be seen as condoning the similar austerity measures undertaken by the Conservative-Liberal Democrat government.
In J. Edgar (2011) the film portrays Leonardo DiCaprio as Hoover by dressing him accordingly in the clothes of the era. There is also short scene where after his mother’s death; he tries on some of her clothes. In the scene Hoover’s character and identity is depicted as conflicted as he undertakes in activities outside the social norm of the epoch. This decision to show Hoover as conflicted tries to evoke sympathy from its audience as he is seen battling against his own sexuality and gender identity. This pays particular attention to the contemporary audience which is more understanding of an individual’s sexuality and gender identity. The problem is that film itself is masquerading contemporary society’s acceptance in a way to show progress in gay rights. The two films depict a certain pastiche of the past in order to relate to how it compares with contemporary society. This distortion of history within film can help us understand a fundamental contradiction with dominant historical narratives and that is in its constant tendency to relate the past to present as a sense of progress.
The tendency within the historical film to be either a contrast or allegory of contemporary society can be determined ideological in its approach. In Marxism and Literary Criticism, Terry Eagleton argues that art is “part of a society’s ideology – an element in that the situation in which one social class has power over the other is either seen by most members of society as ‘natural’, or not seen at all” (2002, p5). The two films can be determined ideological in the sense that they both omitted particular factual information that could be determined a critique on the historical figures. In order to gain some credibility they also humanise their actions by adding particular character traits and flaws. These traits involve both of them in neglecting personal relationships in the pursuit of power. This method can be seen as an attempt to depict the historical figures favourably to the contemporary audience. This is because overtly patriotic characters are often viewed with some contempt due to past actions and prejudices.
There are some moments of patriotism within the films, but the characterisation techniques render them more covert. In J. Edgar (2011) it begins with Hoover stating that “Communism isn’t a political party, it’s a disease, it corrupts the soul”. This makes evident Hoover’s status as an anti-communist and there is little criticism of his political activities and discriminations as the film concentrates on his apparent achievements and sexuality. The Iron Lady (2011) also provides little or no criticisms of the actions of Thatcher as the concentration is focused purely on her gender and rise to power. It gives the audience evidence as to her experience with sexism as the leader of the opposition states that “the lady doth screech too much”. This means that both the biopic films are concentrating on social prejudices of epochs depicted and transforming the historical figures into martyrs. This shows us that in an ideological sense, the films are rewriting history and placing dominant historical figures on the mantle of those who were oppressed. This particularly relates to the present as the films try to appeal to those previously repressed groups, since they have gained certain liberties.
One issue that is often missed when discussing the historical movie is that films themselves are part of an industry. “Art may be, as [Friedrich] Engels remarks, the most highly ‘mediated’ of social products in its relation to the economic base, but in another sense it is also part of that economic base – one kind of economic practice, one type of commodity production, among many” (Eagleton, 2002, p56). This means that even though films and art in general, might have certain freedoms in the ideas they portray, stay are still based within the confines of the economy. The mainstream film industry is particularly attached to the economy, which is due to the domination of multi-national media conglomerates. This means that when assessing films, attention needs be thought of what commodities are used to appeal to a mass audience. The addition of familiar aspects of history and the dominant figures common in past (often western) societies can be determined as commodities. This is because the prospective audience are already familiar with certain aspects of the films historical narrative, which acts an advertisement to those who want to see the stories depiction. This also means that these historical films need to provide something different or unexpected within the film. In the two biopic films discussed this is both Hoover’s depiction as sexually repressed and Thatcher’s portrayal as a feminist icon. The attachment of these identities onto the historical figures can be seen as not only being ideological, but also part of the commodifying process. This is because in gaining certain liberties the previously subjugated individuals have been recognised as prospective consumers. The commodification of sexual and gender conflict can relate to the historical tendency to show progress from past to present. The conflicts are added to the plot structure in order to display sense of fulfilment for apparent contemporary liberties.
There are obvious problems with the commodifying processes of the film industry that contradict their apparent efforts for any historical accuracy. In his article Postmodernism and Consumer Society, Fredric Jameson argues that “The informational function of the media would thus be to help us forget, to serve as the very agents and mechanisms for our historical amnesia” (1989, p205). One example of this is the media empire News Corporation, which owned predominantly by Rupert Murdoch, profited from the deregulation of markets under Thatcher. The actual removal of historical events such as the Wapping demonstrations may relate to the issue that 20th Century Fox (owned by News Corporation) provided the distribution for The Iron Lady (2011). After all a media conglomerate is unlikely to distribute a film that historically depicts their company unfavourably.
The issue remains that any historical narrative should be read with a critical eye, but in particular the historical movie produced for mass market consumption. The distortion of factual information in favour of commodifying history and in order to appeal to their target audience is apparent. It can be considered that not all historical films will depict a narrative that relates to dominant ideas on society. The problem lies with historical narratives such as these two biopic films that depict a naïve sense of progression from the past in which to idealise a faith in the present. The ideological repositioning (or masquerading) of these dominant repressive figures into subjugated icons creates a threat of limiting/losing the liberties so hard fought for.
Bibliography
Belfield, R. & Hird, C. & Kelly, S. (1991) Murdoch: Decline of an Empire. London: MacDonald & Co.
Cook, P. (1996) ‘The Lure of the Past: Reinventing History.’ Fashioning the Nation: Costume and Identity in British Cinema. London: BFI
Eagleton, T (2002) Marxism and Literary Criticism. London & New York: Routledge
Jameson, F. (1989) ‘Postmodernism and Consumer Society.’ In: Kaplan, E. A. Postmodernism and its Discontents. London & New York: Verso
Sbardellati, J & Shaw, T. (2003) ‘Booting a Tramp: Charlie Chaplin, the FBI, and the Construction of Subersive Image in Red Scare America’ Pacific Historical Review. Vol. 72, No. 4 pp 495-530. University of California Press.
White, H. (2002) ‘The Historical Text as a Literary Artifact.’ In: Richardson, B. Narrative Dynamics: Essays on Time, Plot, Closure, and Frames. Ohio State University
Filmography
The Iron Lady (2011) Directed by Phyllida Lloyd. 20th Century Fox.
J. Edgar (2011) Directed by Clint Eastwood. Warner Bros Pictures.
FaceHead 