RAJIV GANDHI NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF LAW, PUNJAB

HISTORY MINOR PROJECT

TITLE: ROLE OF FILMS AS A HISTORICAL SOURCE

Submitted by:

Name- Radhika Aggarwal

Roll number- 20158

Group number- 20

Submitted to:

Dr. Rachna Sharma

Asst. Professor of History

RGNUL, Punjab
 BONAFIDE CERTIFICATE

This certificate is to declare that this project on the topic ‘ROLE OF FILMS AS A
HISTORICAL SOUCRE’ is an original work of Radhika Aggarwal who is a bonafide
student of Rajiv Gandhi National University of Law Punjab.

SIGNATURE

Radhika Aggarwal

2
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

I would like to express my gratitude to Dr. Rachna Sharma, assistant professor of History
at RGNUL, Punjab for her continuous guidance and support which helped me to
complete this project duly.

I would like to thank the Vice Chancellor of RGNUL, Dr. Paramjit Jaswal for providing
me with this opportunity to work on this project and hone my skills.

I would also like to acknowledge the IT Lab of RGNUL for providing me with excellent
tools of research, without which this project would have been a distant reality.

In the end I would like to express my utmost thanks to my family members and my group
mates for providing me with constant encouragement and support to work on this project
sincerely.

3
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

A. Cover Page
B. Bonafide Certificate
C. Acknowledgement
D. Table of Contents
1. Introduction: A Short History of Cinema
1.1 Origin
1.2 The Emergence of an Industry
1.3 The Death of Silent Movies
1.4 The Birth of Coloured Films
2. Films: An Archival Record of Society
3. Films: A Source of Propaganda
3.1 During the First World War
3.2 During the Second World War
4. Films: An Alternative Source of History?
5. Conclusion
6. Bibliography

4
 1. Introduction: A Short History of Cinema

Like any other arts industry, the film industry has made long leaps from when it first
originated in the 19th century. Movies of today are made using technologies which
one couldn’t even fathom a hundred years back. The amalgamation of various
technological advancements over the course of last century has made movies what
they are today. The idea of developing the film industry as an entertainment industry,
the artistic innovations of extraordinary people and some miraculous accidents have
led to astonishing advancements in the industry. Today we see Computer-Generated-
Imagery (CGI) and visual effects (VFX) successfully creating realistic creatures and
environments. From the massive rapidly spinning black hole, Gargantua, in
Interstellar to the entire environment and all the characters (except the protagonist) in
the Jungle Book (2016), it is correct to say that movies of today have evolved to
become a lot more sophisticated and complex than they were before.

However, this level of sophistication and complexity is not only owed to

technological advancements but social growth as well. As the status of various
socially disadvantaged and historically discriminated groups increased in the society,
their portrayal on the silver screen saw improvements too. Not only that, many
movies actually inspired and provided momentum to various movements meant to
uplift these groups. On the other hand, various movies were made to portray these
groups in a bad light, intensify the already existing prejudices against them, while
fueling in new stereotypes and mock them openly. In a way movies have helped
elevate as well as degrade the society.

1.1 Origin

In 1891, Thomas Edison and William Dickinson, invented the kinetoscope. It was a
bureau with a window through which people could experience the illusion of a
moving image.1 Kinetograph was the camera that produced kinetoscope film

1
Alan Williams, Europe 1789–1914: Encyclopedia of the Age of Industry and Empire,
vol. 1, s.v. “Cinema,” Gale Virtual Reference Library. “The Kinetoscope,” British Movie
Classics, http://www.britishmovieclassics.com/thekinetoscope.php
5
 sequences. As the kinetoscope gained adulation, the Edison Company began
installing kinetographs in hotel lobbies, amusement parks, and penny arcades, and
soon kinetoscope parlors.

 In 1895, two siblings Auguste and Louis Lumière patented

the Cinématographe (from which we get the term cinema), a lightweight film
projector that additionally functioned as a camera and printer. Unlike the Edison
kinetograph, the Cinématographe was lightweight enough for easy outdoor filming,
and over the years the brothers used the camera to shoot well over 1,000 short films,
most of which depicted scenes from day-to-day life. In December 1895, in the
basement lounge of the Grand Café, Rue des Capucines in Paris, the Lumières held
the world’s first ever commercial film screening, a sequence of about 10 short scenes,
including the brother’s first film, Workers Leaving the Lumière Factory, a segment
lasting less than a minute and depicting workers leaving the family’s photographic
instrument factory at the end of the day.2

There are reports about the early audience’s incredulity, enchantment, and maybe
even dread at what they were viewing, watching a film was a staggering encounter for
many. Spectators gasped at the realistic details in films such as Robert Paul’s Rough
Sea at Dover, now and again individuals panicked and tried to escape the theater
during films in which trains or moving carriages sped toward the audience3.

1.2 The Emergence of an Industry

Technical innovations allowed filmmakers like Parisian cinema owner Georges

Méliès to experiment with special effects that produced seemingly magical
transformations on screen: blossoms turned into ladies, individuals vanished with
puffs of smoke, and other similar tricks4. These ‘trick films’ were then imitated by
producers in England and U.S.A. Méliès was also the one to introduce the narrative
medium of cinema. The early filmmakers had only ever created single-shot films that
lasted a minute or less, Méliès began joining these short films together to create
2
Encyclopedia of the Age of Industry and Empire, s.v. “Cinema.”
3
David Robinson, From Peep Show to Palace: The Birth of American Film (New York:
Columbia University Press, 1994) at p 63. 
4
Id, at p 74-75
6
 stories. His 30-scene Trip to the Moon (1902), may have been the most widely seen
production in cinema’s first decade5. Edwin S. Porter’s 12-minute film, The Great
Train Robbery (1903), established the realistic narrative as a standard in cinema, it
was also the first major box-office hit. Its success paved the way for the growth of the
film industry, as investors, recognized the motion picture’s great moneymaking
potential.

Early motion picture theatres were known as Nickelodeons because of their five cent
fee. These were especially popular among the working class of the time, who couldn’t
afford live theater. Between 1904 and 1908, around 9,000 nickelodeons appeared in
the United States. It was the nickelodeon’s popularity that established film as a mass
entertainment medium6.

10 leading motion picture companies—including Edison, Biograph, Vitagraph, and

others—formed the Motion Picture Patents Company (MPPC) in 1908. The MPPC
was a trade group that pooled the most significant motion picture patents and
established an exclusive contract between these companies and the Eastman Kodak
Company as a supplier of film stock. Also known as the Trust, the MPPC’s goal was
to standardize the industry and shut out competition through monopolistic control.
Under the Trust’s licensing system, only certain licensed companies could participate
in the exchange, distribution, and production of film at different levels of the industry.
It eventually backfired, leading the excluded, independent distributors to organize in
opposition to the Trust7.

In these early years, theaters were still running single-reel films, which came at a
standard length of 1,000 feet, allowing for about 16 minutes of playing time.
However, companies began to import multiple-reel films from European producers
around 1907, and the format gained popular acceptance in the United States in 1912

5
Id, at p 441
6
Ryan F. Holznagel, Dictionary of American History, 3rd ed., s.v. “Nickelodeon,” Gale
Virtual Reference Library.
7
Raymond Fielding, A Technological History of Motion Pictures and
Television (Berkeley: California Univ. Press, 1967) 21; David Robinson, From Peep
Show to Palace: The Birth of American Film (New York: Columbia University Press,
1994), 101–102
7
 with Louis Mercanton’s highly successful Queen Elizabeth, a three-and-a-half reel
feature. Owing to its popularity, features generally experienced longer runs in theaters
than their single-reel predecessors8. The feature film was one factor that brought
about the eventual downfall of the MPPC. When movie studio, and Trust member,
Vitagraph began to release features like A Tale of Two Cities (1911) and Uncle Tom’s
Cabin (1910), the Trust forced it to exhibit the films serially in single-reel showings
to keep with industry standards. The MPPC also underestimated the appeal of the star
system, a trend that began when producers chose famous stage actors like Mary
Pickford and James O’Neill to play the leading roles in their productions. Because of
the MPPC’s inflexibility, independent companies were the only ones able to
capitalize on these two important trends that were to become film’s future. Today,
few people would recognize names like Vitagraph or Biograph, but the independents
that outlasted them—Universal, Goldwyn (which would later merge with Metro and
Mayer), Fox (later 20th Century Fox), and Paramount (the later version of the Lasky
Corporation)—have become household names9.

1.3 The Death of Silent Movies

In 1925, Warner Bros purchased the rights of Vitaphone, a technology that allowed
adding sound to movies. The pairing of sound with motion pictures was nothing new
in itself. Edison, had commissioned the kinetoscope to create a visual accompaniment
to the phonograph, and many early theaters had orchestra pits to provide musical
accompaniment to their films.  In 1926, Warner debuted the system with the release
of Don Juan, a costume drama accompanied by a recording of the New York
Philharmonic Orchestra. By 1927, after a $3 million campaign, Warner Bros. had
wired more than 150 theaters in the United States, and it released its second sound
film, The Jazz Singer, in which the actor Al Jolson improvised a few lines of
synchronized dialogue and sang six songs. The film was a major breakthrough.
Audiences, hearing an actor speak on screen for the first time, were enchanted10.
8
David Robinson, From Peep Show to Palace: The Birth of American Film (New York:
Columbia University Press, 1994), p.101–102
9
Id p.140.
10
Gochenour, Schlager and Lauer “Birth of the ‘Talkies’: The Development of
Synchronized Sound for Motion Pictures,” in Science and Its Times, vol. 6, 1900–1950,
8
 1.4 The Birth of Coloured Films

Although the techniques of tinting and hand painting were available for adding colour
to films for some time, neither method ever caught on. The hand-painting technique
became impractical as films were mass produced, and the tinting process, which
filmmakers discovered would create an interference with the transmission of sound in
films, was abandoned with the advent of talking movies. However, in 1922, Herbert
Kalmus’ Technicolor Company introduced a dye-transfer technique that allowed it to
produce a full-length film, The Toll of the Sea, in two primary colours11. By 1932,
Technicolor had designed a three-colour system with more realistic results, and for
the next 25 years, all colour films were produced with this improved system. Despite
the success of certain colour films in the 1930s, Hollywood, was feeling the impact of
the Great Depression, and the expenses of special cameras, crews, and Technicolor
lab processing made colour films impractical for studios trying to cut costs.
Therefore, it wasn’t until the end of the 1940s that Technicolor would largely displace
the black-and-white films12.

2. Films: An Archival Record of Society

Movies provide an insight into the societal values of its time. Films, even though
fictional, are reflective of various prejudices and stereotypes existing within a society.
Movies are perhaps the best medium to understand social beliefs and subconscious

(Detroit: Gale, 2000), p. 578.

11
Judith S. Baughman, Motion Pictures in Colour, in American Decades, vol.3.
12
Id
9
 assumptions prevailing during a particular time. Since movies follow a visual and
phonetic (excluding the silent films) medium of communication, a film from the past
will allow viewers to experience the past in a much better way as compared to a
written mode of mass communication like books. Watching a living, breathing human
being, being treated in the most inhumane way because of his or her skin colour,
sexuality or religion is sure to strike a chord in today’s audience while many from the
twentieth century may have found it entertaining and even comical.

There is a grotesque history of Hollywood portraying people of colour as buffoons,

bestial or lethargic. These movies effectuated an existing system by belittling an
already deprived group, so much so, that many did not see the blacks as humans but a
mere caricature, whose sole purpose of existence was serving them and making their
lives easier.

The defenders of slavery argued that people of colour were gratified loyal servants
and used the imagined contentment of the slaves to justify the evil institution. They
argued that how can slavery be immoral when the slaves are happy and want to serve
the white. The Mammy image, one of the most well-known racial depiction of black
women, personified this argument and was used to justify the supposed compassion
of slavery. The Mammy image involved an obese, black woman, a maternal figure,
who lived for her master white family while treating her own family with derision.
Her wide smile and jovial laughter was used to symbolize the non-existent
contentment black people got by being slaves to the white. Mammy was so loyal to
her white family that she often became a surrogate mother/grandmother, risked her
own life to make the life of her white family easier. Interestingly, despite having
multiple offsprings, she was heavily desexualized 13. Perhaps this was done to conceal
the fact that many slaves were sexually abused by their white masters. In D. W.
Griffith's movie The Birth of a Nation (1915), the mammy defends her white master's
home against Union soldiers. The message was clear: Mammy would rather die than
be a free black woman. In the famous movie Gone with the Wind (Selznick &
Fleming, 1939), the black mammy also fights black soldiers whom she believes to be

13
at https://www.ferris.edu/jimcrow/mammies/ (last accessed on 15th November,2020)
10
 a threat to the white madam of the house. During the primary years of the 1900s,
while black Americans were requesting political, social, and monetary progression,
Mammy was very well known in the film industry. The first talking film, 1927's The
Jazz Singer involved Al Jolson in blackface singing "Mammy." In 1934 the film
Imitation of Life, recounted the account of a black servant, Aunt Delilah who
inherited a pancake recipe. This film mammy gave the invaluable recipe to Miss Bea,
her chief. Miss Bea effectively makes a business out of the recipe. She offered Aunt
Delilah a 20% premium in the pancake organization, the kind of money that would
allow Aunt Delilah to purchase her own house and her own car. Despite having lived
her entire life un the clutches of poverty, Aunt Delilah refuses, saying that she does
not want to leave Miss Bea and get her own house, and that she was her cook and
wants to be her cook always. Aunt Delilah worked to keep the white family stable
while her own family disintegrated 14! Needless to say, the mammy figure was
fictional. Most of the house help that looked after the children were light-skinned,
thin women and not black, obese women. The black slaves were often limited to field
work15. The male equivalent of Mammy was Uncle Tom, a degrading creature who
was so devoted to being a servant that he was more than willing to backstab other
blacks. Uncle Tom has evolved to become a huge insult in the black community, a
symbol of a traitor who would betray his own community as he walks on his path of
subservience16.

Another example of an anti-black stereotype personified in the movies of 20 th century

is that black people are generally unfit for the society. The Coon and Sambo
caricatures were used to personify this stereotype. The name Coon, which is short for
raccoon, is in itself extremely derogatory and dehumanizing. Coon and Sambo were
depicted as lethargic, effortlessly scared, constantly inert, garbled, dimwits. The coon
contrasted from the Sambo in subtle however significant manners. Sambo was
portrayed as a never-ending kid, not equipped for living as a free grown-up. The coon
acted immature, despite being an adult. The Coon, who often worked as a servant was
14
Id
15
Id
16
Mubi,a history of black stereotypes onscreen, at https://youtu.be/mEy9ZKf5NOo (last
accessed on 15th November,2020)
11
 not satisfied with his position and desired liberty. However he was too lethargic to
even attempt to improve the quality of his life. This depiction is extremely
problematic and offensive, it mocked the aspirations of the Coon for liberty by
branding them ludicrous and showing how he tried and failed to assimilate into the
white society. The prototypical movie coon was Stepin Fetchit, the slow-talking,
slow-walking, self-demeaning nitwit. It took his character almost a minute to say:
"I'se be catchin' ma feets nah, Boss."  The Sambo much like the Mammy and Uncle
Tom was portrayed as a happy slave with the difference that unlike the other two,
Sambo was a perpetual immature being, not capable of surviving on his own. The
supporters of slavery used these depictions to further their agenda of blacks being
childlike people not capable of living with freedom. Supporters of slavery recognized
that some slave masters were cruel, yet they contended that most were considerate,
kind-hearted people who edified and improved their accommodating dark wards.
There was a public wistfulness for "old fashioned darkies" who cherished their lords,
and, as indicated by the slavery supporters, dismissed or hesitantly accepted
liberation17.

A third category of anti-black stereotype is that black people are animalistic. This
stereotype was personified in Hollywood by hypersexualising black characters,
portraying them as insatiable beings. Women in particular were also portrayed as
being too sassy, unfit for marriage or looking after their own kids. This was done to
further the agenda that black people came in two extreme categories, either too
immature or too selfish, neither of which were fit to assimilate into the society. This
stereotype was personified by the Jezebel character. This can also be seen as an
attempt by the pro-slavery wing to justify the sexual abuse of black female slaves by
their white male masters. The male counterpart of Jezebel involved depicting black
men as hideous, terrifying predators who target helpless victims, especially white
women. ‘This brute’ deserved punishment. Many white writers argued that without
slavery -- which supposedly suppressed their animalistic tendencies -- blacks were
reverting to their criminal antics. The belief that the newly-emancipated blacks were a
"black peril" continued into the early 1900s. The narrative of black brutes contributed
17
Id
12
 to the generalization of blacks being rapists. The case that black beasts were, in
pandemic numbers, assaulting white ladies turned into the public defense for the
lynching of blacks18. This narrative can be seen in the movie The Birth of a Nation,
the movie is one of the most racist movies ever made in the history of cinema. The
movie went on to imply that certain black people are worthy of being lynched. Not
only that, the movie glorified ‘KKK’. The movie is somewhat responsible for the
revival of KKK, which was almost dead by 1915, but when the film came out and
became a hit, the KKK was revived and it capitalized on the film’s success and went
on to become a massive organization by 192019.

While there were racist movies that belittled black people, simultaneously there were
movies that portrayed another side of the society, a better side, a side that was willing
to change things. These movies as opposed to movies like The Birth of a Nation were
extremely anti-racism and rightly so. One such movie was Oscar Micheaux’s Within
Our Gates (1920). A silent 80 minute movie that talks about love, betrayal, murder,
rape, lynching, gambling, racial upliftment and white bigotry without even uttering a
word 20. The movie does not show a world without white supremacists, but shows the
reality of America at that time. Evil ministers who encouraged African-Americans to
reject suffrage, white women who reject suffrage out of fear that black women will
also get voting rights, a black servant who after mocking himself in a room full of
white people, closes the door and transforms into a sad old man from a happy halfwit,
a black getting lynched without any reason21. In contrast to a brute black rapist in
Birth of a Nation, the rapist in this movie is a privileged and respected white male.
The movie on one hand depicts black characters as carrying themselves with modesty
and on the other it also acknowledges those blacks, whose behavior was in line with
the stereotypes22.
18
at https://www.ferris.edu/jimcrow/brute/ (last accessed on 16th November,2020)
19
The Birth of a Nation: The most racist movie ever made? BBC (last accessed on 16th
November,2020)
20
at https://www.historians.org/publications-and-directories/perspectives-on-history/
september-2010/why-ill-watch-oscar-micheauxs-within-our-gates-until-i-wear-it-out (last
accessed on 16th November,2020)
21
Id
22
Id

13
 3. Films: A Source of Propaganda

Propaganda is the dispersal of information- facts, contentions, rumours, misleading

statements, or lies—to impact popular opinion. Deliberateness and a moderately
substantial accentuation on manipulation distinguishes propaganda from easygoing
discussion or the free and simple trade of thoughts 23. During the two world wars,
23
Bruce Lannes Smith, ‘Propaganda’ (March 20, 2020) Encyclopædia Britannica ,
available at https://www.britannica.com/topic/propaganda , (last accessed November 19,
2020)
14
 political leaders and dictators widely used cinema to further their propaganda. Movies
were a relatively newer form of mass communication and had people enchanted. A
substantial part of war strategy involved influencing the youth, motivating or
manipulating them into accepting the ideas and opinions courted by the state leaders.
To achieve this purpose various propaganda movies were made across various
nations. Watching these movies in the current times can help get a sense of what was
going on during the warring years. These movies help to understand the ideas and
opinions held by various leaders and dictators, their reason for supporting these ideas.

3.1 During the First World War

The association of Cinema with war, or with propaganda can be traced back to the
First World War. Official propaganda during the war fell into three categories-
directed at the enemy, home or neutral audience. Britain, unlike Germany, did not
recogonize the significance of cinema in spreading an official point of view. It was
only through the film trade that official filming began. Most of the British propaganda
movies were focused on America, this was because it was a newly emerged world
power and the biggest non-combatant Western nation. The British deemed it
necessary to sway America towards the Allied if it ever decides to shed its strict
neutrality declared by President Wilson24. On 9 February 1916 Charles Urban set sail
for America. He had been commissioned by the covert British propaganda outfit,
known informally as Wellington House, to organise the exhibition in America of a
film Urban himself had produced entitled Britain Prepared. However the movie did
not perform well commercially, as opposed to The Battle of Somme another British
propaganda movie. This movie tried to show a defeat of the British Army during one
of the battles of the war as a moral victory. This was a film directed to boost the
morale of troops and citizens.

3.2 During the Second World War

24
McKernan, Luke. “Propaganda, Patriotism and Profit: Charles Urban and British Official
War Films in America during the First World War.” Film History, vol. 14, no. 3/4, 2002, pp.
369–389. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/3815438. (Last accessed 17 Nov. 2020).
15
 It was during the Second World War that the use of propaganda movies skyrocketed.
The use of propaganda movies by Hitler to spread hate against the Jews, is in
particular very interesting. A critical analysis of these movies have helped the world
to understand how Hitler was able to convince a plethora of citizens that it was
justified to kill more than a million Jews. Much like the racist movies of Hollywood,
German movies under the regime of Hitler produced movies that greatly belittled
Jews. The Jews were portrayed as something less than human, unnatural and immoral
while the Nazis were glorified as saviors. Nazis were careful not to use the words
murder or kill, instead they referred to mass killings as special treatment, final
solution, euthanasia, and gas chambers were called disinfectant areas25.

The Eternal Jew is one of the most infamous Nazi propaganda movie, the whole
movie is nothing but 65 minutes of utter fascism portraying Jews in the most
orthodox and stereotyped manner. A horde of pictures portraying Jews as usurers and
vendors of cheap products are stressed over and over, without any clarifications other
than anti-Semitic notions. Wheeling and dealing products on the roads was not the
Jew's lifestyle, but instead a methods for getting by in Poland, a nation desolated by
the attacking German armed force. The film starts with negative portrayals of Jews as
a poor, parasitic race, which is then contrasted with the rich and vibrant German
culture. In films such as M and The House of Rothschild, the notion that Jews are
deviant, dishonest and hold malice against the rest of German society is forwarded.
The final scenes of the film present the audience with the measures the Nazi's have
taken to minimize the influence of Jews in German society. The film ends with
symbolic representations of rebirth and redemption of the Jews, a positive
consequence of The Final Solution. There are many more films that portray Jews in a
bad light, such as M and The House of Rothschild, where the notion that Jews are
deviant, dishonest and hold malice against the rest of German society is forwarded 26.
And then there were movies like The Triumph of the Will which glorified Hitler to an
unbelievable extent. In one of the scenes, Hitler rides into the town of Nuremburg like

25
India and the contemporary world-I, NCERT, 2017, p.68
26
Supra 25.
16
 a godly figure, with hordes of men, women and children cheering him and clapping
their hands out of glee, with millions of swastika flags in their hands.27

4. Films: An Alternative History?

Historical movies or movies that depict a particular event or era from the past are a
great medium to understand and learn history. However, such movies are not always
accurate and often end up twisting historical facts. One such movie is Pearl Harbor
(2001) based on the 1941 military strike by the Imperial Japanese Army on the
American naval base at Pearl Harbor, Hawaii. One of the most obvious and crucial
errors in the film is seen when Admiral Kimmel is notified that an enemy submarine
was under attack. During the actual events that took place at Pearl Harbor, Kimmel
wasn’t notified until hours after the attack ended. He instead heard of what was taking
place only once the Japanese bombs had already fallen into the harbor. Ben Affleck’s
character joins the Eagle Squadron. However, active-duty members of the U.S. Air
Force weren’t allowed to join this squadron; civilians, though, were able to do so by
27
At https://www.facinghistory.org/holocaust-and-human-behavior/chapter-6/
propaganda-movies (Last accesses 18th November, 2020)
17
 becoming members of the Royal Air Force, or RAF. In an even further error, the
filmmakers chose to adorn Affleck’s Spitfire plane with “RF”, the insignia of the N.
303 Polish Fighter Squadron, although he was flying a British plane In one scene
Hawaiian soldiers listening to radio conversation among the Doolittle team of raiders.
That entire scene was impossible in 1941, as there was no way planes on different
routes, observing radio silence, would produce any noise at all. Communication
between two planes occurs via low-power, short-range radio, meaning a state halfway
across the world would never be able to communicate with those raiding soldiers in
Japan. In one of the film’s childhood scenes, a Stearman biplane crop duster appears
in what is meant to be the year 1923. However, these special aircraft weren’t in use in
the U.S. until a year later in 1924, when they first operated as commercial planes for
cotton-dusting. These errors might not seem significant and it may seem an
overstretch to call a movie an alternative history for such small errors, but for
someone who is trying to learn of the past via these movies, even such small errors
can immensely hamper the learning process. 28
On the other hand there are movies that try to portray history as accurately as
possible, without romanticizing it much. One such movie is Gandhi (1982) directed
by Richard Attenborough. The movie has received much praise for its historically
accurate depictions. The movie contains almost all the historically significant event of
the Mahatma’s life- removal from a first-class train carriage due to his ethnicity and
subsequent fight for Indian civil rights in South Africa (1893-1914); his return to
India (1915); the 1919 Jallianwala Bagh Massacre in Amritsar that saw British Indian
Army soldiers open fire on a gathering of unarmed men, women and children
resulting in hundreds of deaths; Gandhi’s numerous arrests by the British ruling party
in the hope it would diminish his teachings of noncooperation; the Salt March or
Dandi March of 1930 in which, as a demonstration over the British tax on salt,
Gandhi and his followers walked almost 400 miles from Ahmedabad to the sea near
Dandi in order to make salt themselves; his marriage to Kasturba Gandhi (1883-
1944); the end of British rule in 1947 when the British Indian Empire split into
Hindu-majority India and Muslim-majority Pakistan; and his assassination by
shooting at the hands Nathuram Godse in 194829. However even Gandhi failed in
namely two areas of accuracy- The character of Vince Walker and the portrayal of
Mohammed Ali Jinnah. The former is the New York Times’ journalist Gandhi
initially meets in South Africa and then again at the time of Salt March is fictional,
inspired by real-life American war correspondent Webb Miller who did not meet the
real Gandhi in South Africa, but whose coverage of the march on the Dharasana Salt
Works helped change global opinion on the British rule of India. The latter was

28
At https://www.warhistoryonline.com/featured/endless-historical-errors-made-
pearl-harbor-movie.html (Last accessed on 19th November, 2020)
29
At https://www.biography.com/news/how-accurate-is-the-movie-gandhi#:~:text=''Of
%20course%20it's%20a%20cheek,events%20though%2C%20Attenborough
%20generally%20su (Last accessed on 19th November, 2020)
18
 portrayed as a major obstructionist in the Mahatma’s plans and many feel the movie
ignored his commitments to independence from the Colonial rule. The movie is
banned in Pakistan for the very same reason30.

5. Conclusion
Movies are one of the most popular art forms of the 20th and the 21st century. Films,
both fictional and non-fictional, have the ability to reveal a lot about the society from
when it was made. Most movies made in the early 20th century were blatantly racist,
depicting black people as mere caricatures. One of these depictions, the Mammy
figure, has partially transcended into the black best friend narrative. Blacks are still
mostly portrayed as a supporting system to their white counterparts. These depictions
reveal a lot about the society of that time. The Brute Black narrative is something
which the society shall always be ashamed of. Then there were movies that revealed a
more positive side of the society, representing those who were fighting to change the
system.
“With great power, comes great responsibility”- Stan Lee, and this responsibility was
shrugged off by nations during the two world wars. Numerous propaganda movies
30
Id
19
were made during the two periods, painting one group in a bad light while heavily
glorifying the other. Watching and analyzing these movies in today’s times can
provide one with a sense of understanding about the prejudices and stereotypes of that
time. One can easily point out the fallacies in these false, irrational movies. After all it
is more important to understand how Hitler was able to murder the consciousness of
so many people, than knowing how many Jews he murdered.
Another aspect which relates movies to history is the genre of historical narrative
movies. It is quite obvious that these movies are not sources of history but a mere
representation of what is already known about the past. These movies can be used as
pedagogic tools, but with caution. While no movie can be cent percent accurate as it
is impossible to transform a series of events into a two or three hour timeframe, there
are certain movies that twist historical facts to such a degree that they end up
producing a different version of the past altogether.

20
6. Bibliography
A. Articles
1. Alan Williams, Europe 1789–1914: Encyclopedia of the Age of Industry and
Empire, vol. 1, s.v. “Cinema,” Gale Virtual Reference Library. “The
Kinetoscope,” British Movie
Classics, http://www.britishmovieclassics.com/thekinetoscope.php.
2. David Robinson, From Peep Show to Palace: The Birth of American Film (New
York: Columbia University Press, 1994).
3. Ryan F. Holznagel, Dictionary of American History, 3rd ed., s.v. “Nickelodeon,”
Gale Virtual Reference Library.
4. Raymond Fielding, A Technological History of Motion Pictures and
Television (Berkeley: California Univ. Press, 1967).
5. Gochenour, Schlager and Lauer “Birth of the ‘Talkies’: The Development of
Synchronized Sound for Motion Pictures,” in Science and Its Times, vol. 6, 1900–
1950, (Detroit: Gale, 2000).
6. Judith S. Baughman, Motion Pictures in Colour, in American Decades, vol.3.
7. The Birth of a Nation: The most racist movie ever made? BBC.
8. Bruce Lannes Smith, ‘Propaganda’ (March 20, 2020) Encyclopædia Britannica,
available at https://www.britannica.com/topic/propaganda .
9. McKernan, Luke. “Propaganda, Patriotism and Profit: Charles Urban and British
Official War Films in America during the First World War.” Film History, vol. 14, no.
3/4, 2002, pp. 369–389. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/3815438.

21
B. General Internet Sources
1. https://www.ferris.edu/jimcrow/mammies/
2. https://youtu.be/mEy9ZKf5NOo
3. https://www.ferris.edu/jimcrow/brute/
4. https://www.historians.org/publications-and-directories/perspectives-on-history/
september-2010/why-ill-watch-oscar-micheauxs-within-our-gates-until-i-wear-it-
out
5. https://www.facinghistory.org/holocaust-and-human-behavior/chapter-6/
propaganda-movies
6. https://www.warhistoryonline.com/featured/endless-historical-errors-made-pearl-
harbor-movie.html
7. https://www.biography.com/news/how-accurate-is-the-movie-gandhi#:~:text=''Of
%20course%20it's%20a%20cheek,events%20though%2C%20Attenborough
%20generally%20su

C. Books
1. India and the contemporary world-I, NCERT, 2017

22