Welcome to 1789...

I think they must have decided that people wanted 'personal drama' rather than politics/events, so they concentrated on Robespierre, Danton and Desmoulins' relationship: with two of them dead, the drama then hurries up to the end. Hilary Mantel does a similar thing in her novel (only much better), ending it with the execution of the 'Indulgents'. I think this is an increasing tendency in popular history - I don't know if it's a deliberate policy by publishers or film studios, but the concentration is on individual human stories they think we can 'relate' to better, rather than big-stage politics. We seem to have an endless number now of newly published history books about the life of this or that or the other little-known mistress, sister, minor courtier, etc, the other bolyen girl, girl with a pearl earring, the Duchess, Amphibious Thing approach. This week's 'book of the week' on Radio 4 was the life of Napoleon's sister. What next? Robespierre's dog? This wouldn't be a problem if we also got the important stuff - by which I mean the events that had a lasting impact on world history - alongside it, but we don't. We don't get Napoleon, we get his sister, we don't get Fox vs Pitt, Tom Paine or the 1790's political repression of the British Left, we get the Duchess of Devonshire or Beau Brummel. It's amazing that a director as respected as the multi-Oscar Winning Dickie Attenborough has been trying without success for more than 20 years to get a Tom Paine film made, whilst films like The Duchess, Marie Antoinette or about Jefferson's sex life (rather than politics), do get funding.