From jmpfund@bgnet.bgsu.edu Sun Dec 31 00:30:34 2000 Received: from mxu4.u.washington.edu (mxu4.u.washington.edu [140.142.33.8]) by lists.u.washington.edu (8.9.3+UW00.05/8.9.3+UW00.12) with ESMTP id AAA38948 for ; Sun, 31 Dec 2000 00:30:31 -0800 Received: from sp07.notesnet.bgsu.edu (sp07.notesnet.bgsu.edu [129.1.7.7]) by mxu4.u.washington.edu (8.9.3+UW00.02/8.9.3+UW99.09) with ESMTP id AAA10400 for ; Sun, 31 Dec 2000 00:30:31 -0800 Received: from [129.1.190.119] ([129.1.190.119]) by sp07.notesnet.bgsu.edu (Lotus Domino Release 5.0.2b) with ESMTP id 2000123103303231:169 ; Sun, 31 Dec 2000 03:30:32 -0500 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: jmpfund@popj.bgsu.edu Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <3A4ECA08.16E242F2@sympatico.ca> References: <3A4ECA08.16E242F2@sympatico.ca> Date: Sun, 31 Dec 2000 03:30:38 -0400 To: classics@u.washington.edu From: James Pfundstein Subject: Re: More Alexander the Great X-MIMETrack: Itemize by SMTP Server on MAIL03/SERVER/BGSU(Release 5.0.2b |December 16, 1999) at 12/31/2000 03:30:33 AM, Serialize by Router on MAIL03/SERVER/BGSU(Release 5.0.2b |December 16, 1999) at 12/31/2000 03:30:38 AM, Serialize complete at 12/31/2000 03:30:38 AM Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" At 12:54 AM -0500 12/31/00, Phillip Snider wrote: >I agree >with Kathryn Coleman's contention that Gladiator, for instance, should >have made clear somewhere that this is creatively 'enhanced' >(considerable tongue in cheek here) historical fiction presented in the >movie, not real history. Personally, I think it should be stated right >off, but a note at the end of the credits would suffice. We insist on it >when a movie happens in the present (i.e. This is a fictional story. >Any resemblance to actual persons or situations is purely coincidental). >I find it odd that we expect such a note for the present day, but don't >care when there is an equal blatant reconstruction of the past. We (the audience) don't insist on such disclaimers; the producers (or their lawyers) do. And they only insist on a highly visible disclaimer when there is a potentially actionable resemblance between the fictional events and some actual events, especially those that have become somewhat notorious. ("RIPPED FROM THE HEADLINES!" as the peacock network frequently screams in ads for _Law and Order_.) The motivation is not to make a genre distinction but to avoid lawsuits. Movies (unless they are documentaries) are always fiction, and all fiction is fictional. Audiences are actually pretty sophisticated about this: no sensible person relies on James Bond movies, or even Graham Greene novels, as a significant source of information about British espionage activities in the 20th century. A piece of fiction set 2000 years ago is still a piece of fiction. Naturally as a teacher of classics I would much prefer any movie set in the ancient world to be as accurate as possible, to make it all the more effective as a teaching tool. But it is not really the director's or producer's business to create an effective teaching tool; it's their business to make a good movie, according to their lights. Any case for accuracy has to be pitched within these rhetorical limits: what makes a good movie, not what is "true" in some absolute historical sense. Si vera res erit, nihilominus haec omnia narrando conservanda sunt; nam saepe veritas, nisi haec servata sint, fidem non potest facere. --Rhetorica Ad Herennium 1.9.16 JMP("Pseudo-Cicero") .