‘You are, like, so woke’: Dickinson and the anachronistic turn in historical drama

IF 0.5 2区 历史学 Q1 HISTORY Rethinking History Pub Date : 2021-10-02 DOI:10.1080/13642529.2021.1995645
Stephanie Russo
{"title":"‘You are, like, so woke’: Dickinson and the anachronistic turn in historical drama","authors":"Stephanie Russo","doi":"10.1080/13642529.2021.1995645","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Whilst scholars of historical fiction have largely moved away from the idea of accuracy as a means of assessing historical fiction, fidelity to historical facts continues to be considered an important generic requirement of the form. To include anachronisms in any historical fiction is usually considered a mistake or an embarrassment, a sign that the requisite attention to historical detail has lapsed. For a new spate of historical television shows such as Reign (2013–17), Dickinson (2019) and The Great (2020), however, authenticity is not located in an objective measure of accuracy or fidelity, but instead lies within the explicit, textual acknowledgement that the context of creation shapes all historical drama. Apple TV+’s comedy/drama Dickinson, in particular, entirely bypasses the question of accuracy by embracing intentional anachronism. With its soundtrack of contemporary music and a contemporary queer progressive sensibility, Dickinson uses anachronism to suggest a new way of thinking about one of the most mythologised and enigmatic of American literary icons. The show self-consciously draws overt parallels between past and present to emphasise the familiarity of the past, rather than its strangeness, thus rejecting triumphalist readings of history and positing a new way for contemporary audiences to understand and access history. Dickinson also suggests a definition of authenticity that is not reliant on the development of a sense of verisimilitude. In its use of intentional anachronism and its insistence on capturing a sense of affective accuracy, Dickinson suggests a new way of thinking about the function and form of historical fiction in the twenty-first century.","PeriodicalId":46004,"journal":{"name":"Rethinking History","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2021-10-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Rethinking History","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13642529.2021.1995645","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HISTORY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

ABSTRACT Whilst scholars of historical fiction have largely moved away from the idea of accuracy as a means of assessing historical fiction, fidelity to historical facts continues to be considered an important generic requirement of the form. To include anachronisms in any historical fiction is usually considered a mistake or an embarrassment, a sign that the requisite attention to historical detail has lapsed. For a new spate of historical television shows such as Reign (2013–17), Dickinson (2019) and The Great (2020), however, authenticity is not located in an objective measure of accuracy or fidelity, but instead lies within the explicit, textual acknowledgement that the context of creation shapes all historical drama. Apple TV+’s comedy/drama Dickinson, in particular, entirely bypasses the question of accuracy by embracing intentional anachronism. With its soundtrack of contemporary music and a contemporary queer progressive sensibility, Dickinson uses anachronism to suggest a new way of thinking about one of the most mythologised and enigmatic of American literary icons. The show self-consciously draws overt parallels between past and present to emphasise the familiarity of the past, rather than its strangeness, thus rejecting triumphalist readings of history and positing a new way for contemporary audiences to understand and access history. Dickinson also suggests a definition of authenticity that is not reliant on the development of a sense of verisimilitude. In its use of intentional anachronism and its insistence on capturing a sense of affective accuracy, Dickinson suggests a new way of thinking about the function and form of historical fiction in the twenty-first century.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
“你太清醒了”:狄金森和历史剧中不合时宜的转折
虽然历史小说的学者们在很大程度上已经不再把准确性作为评估历史小说的一种手段,但对历史事实的忠诚仍然被认为是这种形式的一个重要的一般要求。在任何历史小说中包含时代错误通常被认为是一个错误或尴尬,这表明对历史细节的必要关注已经消失。然而,对于新一批历史电视剧,如《统治》(2013-17)、《狄金森》(2019)和《伟大》(2020),真实性并不在于客观衡量准确性或保真度,而是在于明确的文本承认,即创作背景塑造了所有历史剧。尤其是Apple TV+的喜剧/戏剧《Dickinson》,它通过有意的时代错误,完全绕过了准确性的问题。狄金森以当代音乐为配乐,以当代酷儿进步的感知力为背景,运用时代错误的手法,提出了一种思考美国文学偶像中最神秘、最神秘的人物之一的新方式。这场展览有意识地将过去和现在进行明显的对比,以强调对过去的熟悉,而不是它的陌生感,从而拒绝了对历史的必胜主义解读,并为当代观众提供了一种理解和接触历史的新方式。狄金森还提出了一个不依赖于真实感发展的真实性定义。狄金森运用有意的时代错误,并坚持捕捉情感上的准确性,为21世纪历史小说的功能和形式提供了一种新的思考方式。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Rethinking History
Rethinking History Multiple-
CiteScore
1.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
26
期刊介绍: This acclaimed journal allows historians in a broad range of specialities to experiment with new ways of presenting and interpreting history. Rethinking History challenges the accepted ways of doing history and rethinks the traditional paradigms, providing a unique forum in which practitioners and theorists can debate and expand the boundaries of the discipline.
期刊最新文献
“The dead do not negotiate”: Hilary Mantel, The Mirror and the Light , and Britain’s obsession with history The ethics of narrative: a readers’ dialogue Militarism in medievalism: the Prince of Thieves video game and the Gulf War Two concepts of apocalypse and apocalyptic history today Pietistic atheism and the modern breakthrough: on the narrative culture of secularity
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1