3 ms·
You're making the same mistake as the article, which is assuming that Ken Burns gives a shit about politics. He will give a "facts-on-the-ground" overview of ev
by tadfisher 2y ago
You're making the same mistake as the article, which is assuming that Ken Burns gives a shit about politics. He will give a "facts-on-the-ground" overview of events at the time, but his films famously have a myopic focus on individuals, their actions and written experiences, sometimes to a fault.
Just like he doesn't really care to put Elliot Ness on an even larger pedestal than the one upon which he currently sits, he doesn't care to delve into the post-war geopolitical situation in SE Asia, because no one wrote about it at the time and it did not matter to front-line soldiers, news reporters, or the American public.
If you want a historiographical survey, read Wikipedia. That's just not the point of a Burns film, and that's okay that you and the author find faults in what he omits.
- AlbertCory 2y agoseveral errors in here: He certainly does care about politics. Just watch his interviews on YouTube, where he describes himself as a "yellow dog Democrat." > put Elliot Ness on an even larger pedestal than the one upon which he currently sits That's not at all what I said about Ness. It was that he did play an important role and that was recognized even at the time. The fact that Hollywood made him into a mythic hero after he was dead doesn't mean he was really nothing at all.