http://www.history.umd.edu/Faculty/DWilliams/Summer05/HIST319W/writing1.html
Natalie Zemon Davis, Robert Rosenstone, and Donald Stevens—three historians of distinct training, methods, scholarly production, and reputation—have each considered a complex, relatively new genre of historical knowledge that Rosenstone calls "the historical film."
In their assigned essays about "film as historical narrative," "history in images/history in words" and "cinema as historical depiction," all three authors—self-consciously writing in the voice of professional historians—express certain reservations about the qualities of feature films* that purport to be historical. All three observe that historical motion pictures may grossly misrepresent the facts for the sake of time, drama, and/or visual impact; feature films are often based upon shaky interpretation that has not gone through rigorous review among professional historians; films are highly dependent upon market conditions; films may, even, threaten to displace the printed text. The authors acknowledge that these problems are not unique to film. Nevertheless, we see an anxiety among these professional, academic historians about historical film.
All three, however, express a certain fascination with the possibilities of history told through motion pictures. We learn that that these historians are film enthusiasts. Davis has served as a consultant for a historical film. Rosenstone has been an advocate for the incorporation of cinema into mainstream historical analysis. Stevens expresses a desire to contribute to everyday yearnings to know the past in a postmodern (visual) culture. All three use film as teaching tools.
Self-consciously writing in the voice of a student of history (and, we would assume, a film enthusiast), you are asked to develop a six-page critical response to issues of historical interpretation posed our three historians. The response should directly engage the issues that these professionals have laid out, identifying points of agreement and disagreement. By the paper's conclusion, your reasoned views of the qualities and possibilities of historical film should be clear.
Like the assigned essays, your argument is going to be highly subjective. That is, there are no right or wrong answers. However, like our three authors, you are expected to draw upon concrete examples of historical film as illustrations of your argumentative points. You are encouraged to use the four films screened during the first two weeks as well as the accompanying assigned readings and handouts.
The paper is due at the beginning of class on Wednesday, July 27, 2005. Your paper should follow all the conventional formatting guidelines (i.e. typed; double-spaced; reasonable margins and fonts; stapled; numbered pages). Binders are not necessary. Late papers will be subject to the late policy stated in the syllabus. Rough drafts are welcome.
*NOTE: Note that all three authors make only passing remarks about documentary filmmaking. You should do the same.