I have a deep fascination with history. When I write about cinema, I always place a lot of emphasis on the historical perspectives of the film in question. In particular, I have a strong interest in the cultural and historical aspects of the late 19th and early 20th century. ‘How The West was Won’, a Western directed by John Ford, Henry Hathaway and George Marshall, is an epic film about America in the 19th century.
The 19th century is an interesting era for human history. It is very relevant for our era because many things in our culture today have their origins and foundations from this particular century. From the modernization of our lives since the Industrial Revolution, to the imperialism and colonialism that would eventually shape our current geopolitics, we can always find the origins from this century if we want to. And don't forget the stunning intellectual development of this era. Thinkers like Darwin, Nietzsche, Freud and Marx have influenced the thoughts and opinions of the modern consciousness. The late 19th century, abound with the presence of brilliant novelists, poets and playwrights, also harbored a happy surprise - the birth of cinema. When the Lumiere brothers showed their first work to an audience – a film showing a train moving forward – the viewers were overwhelmed. Having no previous concepts of anything about motion pictures, the members of the audience were so frightened by the scene that they attempted to escape the theatre, lest the image of the ‘train’ would crash into the showing room. This incident may sound silly for today's audience, who are so well acquainted with motion pictures and television, yet it testified the excitement and fascination of a new art, and served as an anecdote for the future audience to look for the origin of the arts they love.
John Ford was the grand master of the Western genre. With films like ‘Stagecoach’, ‘My Darling Clementine’, ‘The Searchers’, he defined the way of the traditional Western film. Ford was the master of horizontal composition, and he has adopted the painterly approach to the beautiful landscape of the American West. His classicism also included his preferred use of deep focus cinematography. He has also created the archetypal Western hero, known for his self-sufficiency and high moral standard. Ford has influenced many subsequent filmmakers: Akira Kurosawa, Orson Welles, Kenji Mizoguchi and many more. Henry Hathaway and George Marshall, while being lesser-known filmmakers, were also skilful craftsmen of the art and experienced Western directors. ‘How The West was Won’ was a very successfully film. Not only it performed well financially, it received 3 Academy Awards. An interesting side story is that the success of this film has inspired the idea of ‘2001: A Space Odyssey’. Originally, MGM has planned an epic taken in space, and they wanted to call it ‘How The Solar System was Won’. The project would eventually become the Stanley Kubrick masterpiece in 1968.
The story is epic in scope. It was centred around the few generations of a single family, chronicling the most salient historical events in America from the mid-19th to the late 19th century – the Gold Rush, the Civil War, the Railway and the Wild West. The film is divided into 5 segments and the three filmmakers directed different parts of the film. Since the earliest films of D. W. Griffith, the issue of family has always been a focus in American cinema, and this motif is often placed in a larger social or historical context. The approach is quite reminiscent of the Epic Cycles from ancient Greece poems, where the myth of individual families was placed in a grander historical background.
The history of the American West has not only left a lasting impression in people’s minds, but also exerted a huge influence on the art of cinema. The cultural significance and dramatic potential of the American West has led to the ‘Western genre’ of cinema, giving the audience some of the true masters of the craft: John Ford, Howard Hawks, Sam Peckinpah, Sergio Leone, Clint Eastwood, just to name a few. One can easily observe that the classic Westerns tend to be more simplistic in terms of worldview, though not necessarily inferior in terms of quality – no one would doubt John Ford’s mastery of his art form, for instance. Later revisionist Westerns are often more confronting and they explore complex issues that have been polished away by the simpler outlook. For ‘How the West was Won’, it can be considered as a culmination of the classic Western, with the trio of directors giving their best shots in the creation of an American epic.
Rivers have been associated with human lives since the earliest civilizations. In the ancient times, the concept of a co-operative community commenced with the formation of river valley civilizations. While the fluvial environment provided conditions for the development of communal and life-sustainable activities such as agriculture, that also posed problems as humans have not fully grasped nature itself. In ‘How The West was Won’ and many more films, nature is often perceived as a formidable opponent to humans. The fact that the characters had to brave themselves through the river signified the impact of the force of nature on humanity. Having an attempt to control nature was a testament of not only of the courage of the adventurers, but also the confirmation of the curiosity of humans towards their world.
The differing perspectives of the people regarding human rights and slavery would eventually lead to the Civil War, a crisis for America in the mid-19th century. The segment was directed by Ford himself and it was of course masterful. The filmmaker was not afraid to show the contradictory perspectives inherent in the war, and the disillusionment the violence would most certainly lead to. The young son of the family wanted to escape from his mundane life as a farmer, so he joined the army for the sake of patriotism. It was when he was in the combat that he appreciated that no one really won in a war, and the illusion of ideology and beliefs have often masked the individuals behind the war, and that was so especially when the young son befriended another soldier on the enemy side. True, in a historical context President Lincoln had not much choices to engage in the Civil War, and at the end a lot of slaves were liberated, yet anyone would ask for an alternative approach to resolve conflicts rather than recourse to violence. After the Civil War the country was concentrated on setting up the telegraph lines and the building of railways. Yet the conflicts in corporate interests have led to a complex web of problems, including the threats of outlaws and exploitations of the weak.
The notion of the American West has led to the important yet controversial ‘Frontier Thesis’ by Turner, which proposed that many national values of America – like individualism, democracy, and egalitarianism – were facilitated by the people’s exploration of the Frontier through their westward movement. The thesis has been very instrumental in the formation of the orthodox American values of the 20th century, and it has achieved an idealistic and almost mythical status for the later generations, where people would view these people from the past as role models of how to lead an ethical and committed life. Yet, the thesis has led to a lot of criticism in later 20th century with a more progressive academic atmosphere. The key limitation of the Turner thesis, though it was certainly a reflection of the era it originated, is that it has undermined many complex issues, such as gender and racial inequalities, bureaucratic issues and corporate greed. Life in the West might not be as idealized and fair as it might appear: exploitation and injustice towards immigrants and certain racial groups were very noticeable issues. These issues were addressed in later Westerns films like ‘The West Bunch’, ‘McCabe and Mrs. Miller’ and ‘Heaven’s Gate’, and they often took a cynical anti-Western tone.
These issues provide us an opportunity to appreciate the purpose of historical inquiry. One should not merely listen to one single version of history and be misled by someone’s indoctrination. An objective frame of mind has to be cast in the analysis of any historical data. There is no such thing as a perfect system in this world. Be it a concept, an opinion, or a theory, they will always be limited by their design, their circumstances, and the limits of the human mind. Every issue has its pros and cons, and mere faith in a single, authoritative version of history will undermine the critical stance humans are gifted in. To be critical is not only important for studying history in an academic setting - it is just as important for inquiries of all subjects in Humanities.
by Ed Law
Film Analysis
