![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png)
![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png)
I know that there aren't any official minutes of the March 30 joint meeting of the Committees (or any meeting, really), but there are at least partial accounts of what transpired. Does anyone know of a relatively complete account, either from some primary source document (ie. someone's memoirs) or something pieced together by historians)?
no subject
Date: 2008-08-21 10:28 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-08-22 12:51 am (UTC)Anyway, I agree with you on Danton. If I say I think it's brilliant it's more because - not that I know much about films, but - it's gorgeous and well-acted and really very clever - Wajda is definitely talented. But it does seem a little scary in retrospect that we watched it in 10th grade history. (It was actually what triggered my interest in the Revolution - so I guess I personally was not destroyed by being served Wajda in lieu of history - but so I also know what kind of impression it makes without any prior knowledge of the events!)
Ah, I think I understand better what you mean now. Right, I recall some that rubbing me the wrong way too. It does seem rather narrow-oversimplified (I expect there was a little more variation in opinions than that..) - and though of course I was not around to see what attitudes were like on the eve of the bicentennial, what he describes seems a bit.. contrary to other impressions? (It was a good book, though, by the way - I had never read Darnton and came across it by chance at the library. It's also full of deliciously nerdy stories about publishing during the Enlightenment.)
no subject
Date: 2008-08-22 06:38 am (UTC)I can see how someone knowing nothing about the Revolution--or even someone who did know something and could put it out of their mind--could appreciate "Danton"'s qualities as a film, but personally, the mutilation of history was far too distracting for me to be able to do that. >.> In general though, I think the impression people get from watching "Danton" is too often their first and last, or close to it, so it's doubtless more damaging for your average person who doesn't take a particularly strong interest in the Revolution to watch it.
I suppose I shouldn't be too hard on Darnton in particular, since there are very few American historians who don't use that patronizing kind of tone when speaking of their European, and in particular, French colleagues. Nevertheless, it's definitely lowered him in my estimation, which is always disappointing. (Doubtless it is; nerdy details on publishing are Darnton's speciality. I just wish he would have stuck to it.)
no subject
Date: 2008-08-23 07:48 pm (UTC)Interestingly though - when I try to tap into my initial reactions to the film, knowing nothing of the Revolution - what I remember distinctly, which seems to disagree with what people say about it, is that I felt very sympathetic toward Robespierre - as in the scene when he's lying there sweating at the end; I think I came away with the impression that his was the character you could really understand in the end. (And I don't think it was some sort of intrinsic personal bias since I've often since been more inclined toward the Dantonists!) Obviously I don't want to suggest that everyone who sees it will share my impression; but at least I know it's possible - so I've wondered if it's primarily people who know the situation who see Robespierre as being so vilified in the film. That is quite a general statement and the reaction of a then-15-year-old american is not necessarily the best testimonial; but it would be interesting to see what the 'average person' really gets out of Danton. For myself, I've no idea exactly how I feel about it, but that's fine with me.
Yes. :( Well, I suppose I haven't yet discovered a historian for whom this was not the case. (If anyone has, I'm not sure whether I'll be impressed or wary.)
no subject
Date: 2008-08-22 11:12 pm (UTC)Maybe it's a girl thing? Maybe blokes watch and go, yeah, Danton's getting pissed and fucking whores, what a mensch!
no subject
Date: 2008-08-22 11:24 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-08-23 12:05 am (UTC)Have you heard of the insane-sounding 5 hour musical play done in the late 80's, with James Marsters from 'Buffy' as Robespierre, who is shown screwing his sister or something like that? Gawd!
no subject
Date: 2008-08-23 02:24 am (UTC)Out of curiosity, how was the trial (if it was shown onstage) handled? If it's in there, I'd imagine it's hard to do convincingly...
no subject
Date: 2008-08-23 06:19 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-08-23 04:25 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-08-23 05:30 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-09-04 12:26 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-08-23 08:00 pm (UTC)...you know, that must be it.
no subject
Date: 2008-08-22 03:41 pm (UTC)I've read a few excerpts from it (the ones I could get for free online) and some of the characterization is definitely strange, probably the result of the author's obsessive fixation with Robespierre that, to my understanding, is somewhat irrelevant to the real Robespierre. I read enough to realize I should not be reading this until I finish my current project researching the trial of the indulgents lest it influence my conclusions in strange ways...
That seems to be the problem pretty much all historical fiction (and even some historical fact...) about the Revolution, or most of history. People tend to forget about the "fiction" part of "historical fiction" even though it is clearly stated in the title of the genre!
no subject
Date: 2008-08-22 05:16 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-08-22 11:19 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-08-22 11:21 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-08-22 11:49 pm (UTC)