Portal de Periódicos da CAPES

Teaching JFK (1991): Potential Dynamite in the Hands of Our Youth?

1998; Volume: 28; Issue: 1-2 Linguagem: Inglês

10.1353/flm.1998.a395819

1548-9922

Ron Briley,

Innovative Teaching Methodologies in Social Sciences

Briley | Teaching 7F/C(1991 ): Potential Dynamite in the Hands of Our Youth? Ron Briley Sandia Preparatory School, Albuquerque, New Mexico Teaching JFK(1991): Potential Dynamite in the Hands of Our Youth? Kevin Costneras New Orleans DistrictAttorney Jim Garrison. 8 I Film & History Oliver Stone as Cinematic Historian | Special In-Depth Section Director Oliver Stone dedicated his controversial film JFK(1991) to the young, "in whose spirit the search for truth marches on."1 For the last five years, I have attempted to implement Stone's dedication by using JFKin the high school classroom as a vehicle through which students may be exposed to historical argument, interpretation, multiple perspective, and critical thinking. In searching for the truth, the process ofthinking and analysis often prove more important than the elusive end result, yet this journey is not one to be taken lightly. In a forum on JFKpublished in the American Historical Review, Marcus Raskin described the film as "potential dynamite," asserting that Stone used the Kennedy assassination to "force an audience to decide whether it wants to ground the American political process in the post-Cold War era with the same structure and habits ofmind that governed it during the Cold War."2 However, many critics fear that young people lack the historical background and critical judgment to evaluate Stone's contention that a conspiracy involving the nation's military-industrial complex was responsible for the murder of President John F. Kennedy. They are concerned about the brainwashing ofyouth through the skillful manipulation of images by a talented film artist. Thus, Boston Globe syndicated columnist Ellen Holtz Goodman warned, "The younger generation gets its information and infotainment from television and movies. Less information . More entertainment ... Oliver Stone's theory may become the only version and Lee Harvey Oswald may forever look like actor Gary Oldman." In a similar vein, New York Times film critic Janet Maslin asserted, "Without a knowledge of conspiracy theory trivia to match the director's, and without any ability to assess the film's erratic assessment of facts and fictions, the viewer is at the filmmaker's mercy."3 JFK and Alienated Youth Indeed, there is anecdotal evidence to support the speculations of Goodman and Maslin. Newsday reporter John Hanc interviewed New York college students on their reaction to the film, concluding that, in general, the younger audience found Stone's film convincing. For example, one young man told Hanc, "I always thought Oswald was just a nut and another nut shot him. That's basically what I was taught. But now I'm convinced it was a plot." Others displayed a sense of cynicism, with a young woman commenting, "I was just so taken by this movie. Because I'm sick of this government. It's such a joke."4 In my teaching of the film, I have encountered similar attitudes with my students (that is, before we begin to analyze and deconstruct the film within historical context). Certainly many young people today are disillusioned and concerned regarding their future in the American economic system. They are also questioning of authority and identify with Jim Garrison's (Kevin Costner) challenge to the Establishment . In fact, Stone's film may be internalized by adolescents as confronting the values and assumptions of the parental establishment.5 There is also a tendency among students to perceive issues in terms of absolutes. After grade school presentations of the grand master narrative of American progress, Stone's depiction ofmodern America as a fascist state controlled by big business and the military (under the guise of democracy and individualism) resonates with young people. Thus, I have found students initially much more attracted to Stone's JFK than his more recent Nixon (1995), which presents a far more ambivalent and complex portrait of the former President who was the embodiment of the evil corporate state for many in my generation. Acknowledging that Stone's cinematic presentation of the Kennedy assassination appeals to the alienation of adolescents does not mean that we should ignore Stone's cinema and fail to teach JFK. As Rolling Stone magazine suggested, assuming that the young people ofAmerica lack the intelligence and emotional maturity to handle Stone's powerful...