Tuesday, November 13, 2012

An Interesting Critique of Lincoln

Yesterday The New York Times published  an interesting critique of Lincoln, written by Kate Masur. Having not seen the film yet, I'll hold my own judgement of Masur's op-ed. If you have seen it - feel free to weigh in.


  1. Professor Masur's opinions may have some validity (up to a point), but the movie tells the story of the political struggle to get the 13th amendment passed in the House. Since African-American had literally no direct voice in the process, it is not surprising that they are not portrayed as having a direct, significant role in the central theme of the movie.
    I have seen the movie and believ it to be outstanding! Those with knowledge of the people and personalities portrayed will find endless little details that the movie gets right. Admittedly, there is some degree of "Hollywoodization" - time compression, fusion of characters, placement of people in locations/situations not supported by facts, etc - but these are actually rather minor and really don't detract from the overall effect.

  2. Thanks for your comment. I just saw the film yesterday myself, and I tend to agree. I would have liked to see Spielberg find a way to get Frederick Douglass's voice into the narrative, but on the whole I felt the film was excellent and Masur's critique a bit of a nitpick.