大众想象与历史现实

IF 0.5 Q1 HISTORY Public History Review Pub Date : 2018-12-27 DOI:10.5130/phrj.v25i0.6157
Mirela Cufurovic
{"title":"大众想象与历史现实","authors":"Mirela Cufurovic","doi":"10.5130/phrj.v25i0.6157","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Historical films have been subject to controversy and criticism within the discipline of history upon the rise of popular interest in new and innovative forms of historical representation. The five to seven years between the release of Gladiator (2000) and Rome (2005-2007) saw an upsurge of historical films focusing on the ‘epic’: the spectacular, monumental and immersive periods of history that exude a mix of historical reality and speculative fiction. This paper argues that it is not historical accuracy or film as historical evidence that matters, but the historical questions and debates that film raises for its audience and the historical profession regarding the past it presents and its implication on history. Such questions and debates base themselves around the extent to which filmmakers are able to interpret history through images and what kind of historical understandings it hopes to achieve. This paper analyses the complexity of public history through a comparative study of reviews on five online message boards, such as IMBD, Amazon, TV.com and Metacritic, relating to HBO’s Rome – chosen due to its unique ability of igniting historiographical debate by presenting history as an accident, thus allowing audiences to question and reinterpret the outcome of historical events. \nKEYWORDSHBO; Rome; Film; Historiography; Public History; Popular Imagination","PeriodicalId":41934,"journal":{"name":"Public History Review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2018-12-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.5130/phrj.v25i0.6157","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Popular Imagination Versus Historical Reality\",\"authors\":\"Mirela Cufurovic\",\"doi\":\"10.5130/phrj.v25i0.6157\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Historical films have been subject to controversy and criticism within the discipline of history upon the rise of popular interest in new and innovative forms of historical representation. The five to seven years between the release of Gladiator (2000) and Rome (2005-2007) saw an upsurge of historical films focusing on the ‘epic’: the spectacular, monumental and immersive periods of history that exude a mix of historical reality and speculative fiction. This paper argues that it is not historical accuracy or film as historical evidence that matters, but the historical questions and debates that film raises for its audience and the historical profession regarding the past it presents and its implication on history. Such questions and debates base themselves around the extent to which filmmakers are able to interpret history through images and what kind of historical understandings it hopes to achieve. This paper analyses the complexity of public history through a comparative study of reviews on five online message boards, such as IMBD, Amazon, TV.com and Metacritic, relating to HBO’s Rome – chosen due to its unique ability of igniting historiographical debate by presenting history as an accident, thus allowing audiences to question and reinterpret the outcome of historical events. \\nKEYWORDSHBO; Rome; Film; Historiography; Public History; Popular Imagination\",\"PeriodicalId\":41934,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Public History Review\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2018-12-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.5130/phrj.v25i0.6157\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Public History Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5130/phrj.v25i0.6157\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"HISTORY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Public History Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5130/phrj.v25i0.6157","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HISTORY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

随着人们对新的和创新的历史表现形式的兴趣的兴起,历史电影一直受到历史学科的争议和批评。在《角斗士》(2000)和《罗马》(2005-2007)上映之间的五到七年里,历史电影的高潮集中在“史诗”上:壮观的、不朽的、身历其境的历史时期,散发出历史现实和投机小说的混合。本文认为,重要的不是历史准确性或电影作为历史证据,而是电影为观众和历史专业提出的关于它所呈现的过去及其对历史的影响的历史问题和辩论。这些问题和争论的基础是电影人能够在多大程度上通过图像解释历史,以及它希望实现什么样的历史理解。本文通过对IMBD、亚马逊、TV.com和Metacritic等五个在线留言板上与HBO的《罗马》有关的评论进行比较研究,分析了公共历史的复杂性。选择《罗马》是因为它具有独特的能力,通过将历史呈现为一场意外,从而引发了史学上的辩论,从而让观众质疑和重新解释历史事件的结果。KEYWORDSHBO;罗马;电影;史学的;公共历史;大众的想象力
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Popular Imagination Versus Historical Reality
Historical films have been subject to controversy and criticism within the discipline of history upon the rise of popular interest in new and innovative forms of historical representation. The five to seven years between the release of Gladiator (2000) and Rome (2005-2007) saw an upsurge of historical films focusing on the ‘epic’: the spectacular, monumental and immersive periods of history that exude a mix of historical reality and speculative fiction. This paper argues that it is not historical accuracy or film as historical evidence that matters, but the historical questions and debates that film raises for its audience and the historical profession regarding the past it presents and its implication on history. Such questions and debates base themselves around the extent to which filmmakers are able to interpret history through images and what kind of historical understandings it hopes to achieve. This paper analyses the complexity of public history through a comparative study of reviews on five online message boards, such as IMBD, Amazon, TV.com and Metacritic, relating to HBO’s Rome – chosen due to its unique ability of igniting historiographical debate by presenting history as an accident, thus allowing audiences to question and reinterpret the outcome of historical events. KEYWORDSHBO; Rome; Film; Historiography; Public History; Popular Imagination
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
3
审稿时长
52 weeks
期刊最新文献
The Memorial Afterlives of Online Crowdsourcing A New Zeal for History: For a New International Public History Public History, National Museums and Transnational History Prosuming History in China: a Paradigm Shift
×
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