The more things change, the more they stay the same. I have always been a fan of the Ken Burns' films, but this one seems so timely. As we in the USA grapple with the role of government, particularly as it relates to the morality and behavior of its citizenry, the message of this film and in the Prohibition era could not be more timely. The ironic thing to me is that I think that it touches much more than Burns himself might suspect.
The thesis of the film is that anytime the government of the United States attempts to regulate the private morality of its citizens, the government will face rebellion and enormous problems. The film is broken up into 3 episodes, each 90-105 minutes long. Episode 1, "A Nation of Drunkards", traces the history of what was called the temperance movement. This was the movement that began in the 1800's which called for making alcohol illegal. It eventually succeeded when the 18th amendment of the Constitution was passed that limited alcohol's distribution. Then, the Volstead Act went even farther and made nearly all drinking illegal. Episode 2, "A Nation of Scofflaws", traces the fallout after Prohibition is finally enacted. It mainly shows the business opportunities that were created by the law. It interviews sons and daughters of bootleggers, and gives great insight into what Prohibition opened up the door to. Episode 3, "A Nation of Hypocrites", traces the downward spiral caused by Prohibition. It shows the horrible crime in Chicago, the stock market crash of 1929, and the eventual repeal of the 18th amendment in 1933. Along the way, the film does a fantastic job of showing how this law become a reality (after all, it is hard to believe that at one time you could get 66% of the elected officials in the country to agree to anything, let alone making Schlitz illegal), and why the reality failed. What intrigues me is what we do with the notion that the government cannot legislate morality. To me, that phrase is problematic. To one degree or another, the government has to regulate the morality of some things, the problem becomes whose morality do we legislate and when do we do it?
Ken Burns' films always do a wonderful job of showing the paradoxes that make up the American experience. In "The Civil War", the paradox was the constant struggle between centralized Federal Power and states' rights. In "Baseball", the paradox was the struggle between management and labor, as the film focused on the rights of the players versus the powerful owners. In "Jazz", the viewer is asked to grapple with the fact that the most American of art forms, jazz, was created, nurtured and perfected by a group of people who had been enslaved and made second class citizens. All of his films seem comfortable to leave some tension, even while they do make moral judgments. "Prohibition" fits right in with the rest of this films. For one thing, it reminds us that public discussion of people's private morality is not anything new. We seem to think that our generation is the first to deal with that, but every generation does. True, the topics might change over time, but in the end, the basic conflict is remarkably similar. The other wonderful American paradox that is present in this film is the ongoing struggle between rural America and urban America. In the 20's, rural America got its way, and urban America would have none of it.
The trick then becomes when does the general welfare of the whole become enough of an issue to legislate something. Right now, there is a debate raging in the nation because some think that government mandated health care is in the whole country's best interest, while others feel that it is an interference of the government to legislate that people buy health insurance. It is actually humorous to see the historians speak with such conviction regarding how erroneous prohibition was, because the folks who favored prohibition were making many of the same arguments that are made today regarding health care. This is not to say that the argument for health care is not valid, but it is to say that we need to be careful to not judge laws too harshly before we see how they work out. With prohibition, Burns does a fantastic job of giving this law context. It makes sense how this law came to pass given the nation of drunkards that did indeed exist pre-1920. But now, we have the luxury of reflection and knowing how the law ended up doing. I suppose the best thing we can learn from films like this is that we need not cling to tightly to laws, even if we are in favor of them. A fair person should be able to look at both a laws content and it effectiveness and make a judgment as to whether or not it will stand.
All of this content and historical ruminating would be interesting enough on its own. But Ken Burns is a filmmaker, and there is an art to what he does. The voices that he has read the news articles and writings are always great. In the film, we hear familiar voices such as Tom Hanks, John Lithgow, Samuel L. Jackson and others. Also, his choice of music is wonderful. The music infuses the time with so much life. Burns also does a wonderful job giving us many images of glasses being filled with beer or liquor. He gives us shots of bars that have clearly been through a long night, and he gives us the sounds of tinkling glass, pouring liquid, and celebratory cheers. All of these effects made me thirsty. It was as if the filmmaker was intentionally showing the aesthetic beauty of alcohol to make the viewer yearn for it, all the while reminding the viewer that this human pleasure had been made a federal crime for a time.
The film also does a wonderful job of taking the good with the bad, There are several interviewees who are recovering alcoholics. There is even a snippet at the end of the film which depicts the forming of Alcoholics Anonymous, an organization which had its origin right after prohibition was overturned. Alcohol is a substance that is abused after all, and that truth is not glossed over. But what Burns does is give us another wonderful meditation on the meaning of freedom and what it means to be an American. As we now struggle as a nation with health care, abortion, gay rights, gun control, and a host of other topics, let us all remember that we all have our moralities. We all feel we may have the answer for what could make a better country. Let us all be humble and reach solutions together. As I see the increasing dissonance again between the metropolitan cities and the quiet country sides of America, I hope that we can work together, realize that we can't get anywhere separately, and see what we have in common instead of focusing on differences. If we don't, I fear we could see something again like the craziness of the 1920's.
No comments:
Post a Comment