영화로 쓰는 역사 이야기

Thinking about the Films on Medieval Age

Film is perhaps the most common way the modern public is exposed to history. As many readers will know, the long debate among historians about the relevance and value of historiophoty－the creation of valid or useful historical narrative in film－has been “won” for the moment at least, by the advocates of film. Hayden White's currently dominant assertion of the essentially tropic, necessarily “fictive character of historical reconstructions”, and their conformity to ideologically－driven genres (“realist history as comedy, tragedy, etc.”) was developed nearly a quarter-century ago. White, after all, was mostly following Foucault on history as subjective and perverse construction, as it seems we all must. The ancient contrast between poetry and history, and the crossover between them, anticipate the contrasts and crossover between historical film and historical prose. In reflecting on film as a medium for presenting history, we should remember that filmmakers have only a hundred years of experience behind them. Historical writers have had more than 2500 years. Film is only beginning to find its way as a medium for history. Of course, all historical film is necessarily mythic: a radical selection andrearrangement of facts plus exemplary fictions into a narrative that embodies an interpretation. But the historical monograph is no less shaped or constructed than the historical film. It may be shaped by different principles, but there is no reason why a filmed representation of historical events should not be as analytical and realistic as any written account. Some films, it is true, are simply a matter of entertainment, but many others use a particular artistic form to take part in a cultural discussion while also being entertaining. A large number of successful entertaining films have involved a good deal of political commentary, and entire genres are concerned with how we, as human beings, deal with pain and suffering. The contemporary reception of movie might also be an interesting area for historian's consideration Medieval historians who comment on movies are often painfully unaware for both the importance of conventions in the history of cinema, not to mention the significance of understanding that particular directors may manifest a distinct auteur style. I want to argue that there are ways to think about historical movies as they actually are that might make sense to a professional historian, and perhaps more importantly to anyone who enjoys a movie but wants also to be able to think about film critically.