Reply to DCPS, Selma and the distortion of history

Forum Index » DC Public and Public Charter Schools

Reply to "DCPS, Selma and the distortion of history"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=jsteele][quote=Anonymous][quote=jsteele][quote=Anonymous][quote=jsteele][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]

I just saw the movie and I don't see a lie here. Can you elaborate? [/quote]

Telephone Discussion of Voting Rights Act Jan 15, 1965 between LBJ and MLK

****
President Johnson: That's exactly right. I think it's very important that we not say that we're doing this, and we not do it just because it's negroes or whites. But we take the position that every person born in this country and when they reach a certain age, that he have a right to vote, just like he has a right to fight. And that we just extend it whether it's a Negro or whether it's a Mexican or who it is.
King: That's right.
[/quote]

Can you describe out how that was misrepresented in the movie (I haven't seen the movie, so I don't know)?
[/quote]

Johnson makes very clear that, even as he's strategizing to move various legislation forward, the Voting Rights bill is his most important priority and , he says, in its  potential impact it may even exceed the Civil Rights Act of 64.  As has been reported, he advises King to find the most outrageous examples of denial of the franchise, in the worst places, and highlight them and publicize them to turn public opinion, particularly among otherwise indifferent white voters.  This shows how LBJ and King were working, if not always in coordinated fashion, in a very complementary way to build political momentum to get voting rights legislation through Congress.[/quote]

Right, but how did the movie misrepresent this conversation?
[/quote]

Given the amount of documented fabrications, and the fact that the movie director explicitly has said that she wasn't trying to create a documentary, the question is the opposite...how did the movie exactly and meaningfully represent reality?

It seems, clearly not enough.[/quote]

Bill Moyers, someone who was in a position to know and who has some criticisms of the film feels differently:

"There are some beautiful and poignant moments in the film that take us closer to the truth than anything I’ve seen in other movies to date:..."

snip

"So it’s a powerful but flawed film. Go see it, though – it’s good to be reminded of a time when courage on the street is met by a moral response from power."

snip

"As for how the film portrays Lyndon B. Johnson: There’s one egregious and outrageous portrayal that is the worst kind of creative license because it suggests the very opposite of the truth, in this case, that the president was behind J. Edgar Hoover’s sending the “sex tape” to Coretta King."

http://billmoyers.com/2015/01/15/bill-moyers-selma-lbj/

So, contrary to your suggestion, Moyers thinks the film only has a single "egregious" portrayal of LBJ and none of the film's critics in this thread have even mentioned it.

In my opinion, this is simply a classic case of people of color being held to a much higher standard. But, to answer your question as to how did this "movie exactly and meaningfully represent reality?" At least Moyers thinks it does it better than any other film. Is that good enough for you?

[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics