|
War films: the forgotten front |
- By Crisco 1492
When many of us joined WikiProject Military History, we expected to work on biographies and histories of battles, ships, and other war machines. I know I did, and my first A-class article was on an event which precipitated a 2-year long war. My subsequent articles have likewise been in this field, as have most of our editors: a third of our 662 featured articles are biographies, with another 187 related to naval warfare and 89 on aviation (although there is some overlap).
There is, however, a subject which, in the year I've been following the project, has been severely underrepresented: war films. Our task force defines war films under the project's scope as "all films concerned with historical warfare ... [including] both films that depict actual events in military history (whether accurately or otherwise) ... [and] films that focus on fictional events but depict actual historical militaries or for which a discussion of real military influence is applicable". In practice this has also extended to propaganda films related to military, be they documentaries or featured films. At the time of writing, we have a total of five featured articles which fall under our scope, as well as two featured lists and twenty-one good articles, including a Disney cartoon, a British horror film, and a documentary.
This comparative lack of coverage is, in my opinion, something we need to deal with. The majority of our readers become familiar with military history not by reading textbooks, but by watching films. Without adequate coverage of these films, including links to articles on the actual events themselves, our readers will not be able to properly contextualise the films and learn of the actual events, or – in cases such as Pengkhianatan G30S/PKI – understand how events in the film may have been manipulated to serve a political purpose. In other words, to reach out to and educate the average reader we should beef up our articles on military-related films and other fictional works.
For many of us, this is a daunting task. The standards for film articles differ from those of history articles, and they have their own Manual of Style. The references on which we must depend are different: in many cases we must depend extensively on the popular press and audio commentary, rather than books released through academic publishers. We have to filter out the junk references – the purely gossip rags – and find quality reviews, often in leading papers. We must recognise that plot summaries do not require in-text citations, as they are assumed to be sourced to the work itself. And, perhaps the most difficult of all, we must venture into the realm of interpretation: symbolism, imagery, and intertextuality (as reported in reliable sources, naturally).
How can we help? Firstly, we have to remember that we're not alone. We can cooperate with other projects with whom there is an overlap, especially WikiProject Film. These outside writers may be more familiar with specific style guidelines, what websites and newspapers have been deemed reliable sources, and how to write sections on themes and interpretations (including terminology). We also have to familiarise ourselves with the guidelines: How can organise film articles? How long can the plot summary be? What can we use from Rotten Tomatoes and the Internet Movie Database for?
Once we're ready to write, we have to choose a subject: do we want to deal with high-profile war films, like the Academy Award winner Saving Private Ryan, or specialist films such as Janur Kuning? Each will have its own challenges and benefits, both in sourcing, interest in the article (from both readers and editors), and accessibility. Then, like for all articles, we have to do our research: watch the movie, keep our eyes open for coverage and reviews, and search for academic discussion of works. Then, it's a simple matter of applying some elbow grease and writing as we would normally, being careful to attribute opinions.
Sure, it's not going to turn out perfect every time. We'll make mistakes. That's fine. In the end, we're fighting the good fight: bringing the war to the people, for the people.
- Crisco 1492 is a Canadian student who lives in Indonesia and joined Wikipedia in 2005. He is an administrator, and has brought 11 articles, 5 lists, and numerous pictures to Featured status.
|
|
War films: the forgotten front |
- By Crisco 1492
When many of us joined WikiProject Military History, we expected to work on biographies and histories of battles, ships, and other war machines. I know I did, and my first A-class article was on an event which precipitated a 2-year long war. My subsequent articles have likewise been in this field, as have most of our editors: a third of our 662 featured articles are biographies, with another 187 related to naval warfare and 89 on aviation (although there is some overlap).
There is, however, a subject which, in the year I've been following the project, has been severely underrepresented: war films. Our task force defines war films under the project's scope as "all films concerned with historical warfare ... [including] both films that depict actual events in military history (whether accurately or otherwise) ... [and] films that focus on fictional events but depict actual historical militaries or for which a discussion of real military influence is applicable". In practice this has also extended to propaganda films related to military, be they documentaries or featured films. At the time of writing, we have a total of five featured articles which fall under our scope, as well as two featured lists and twenty-one good articles, including a Disney cartoon, a British horror film, and a documentary.
This comparative lack of coverage is, in my opinion, something we need to deal with. The majority of our readers become familiar with military history not by reading textbooks, but by watching films. Without adequate coverage of these films, including links to articles on the actual events themselves, our readers will not be able to properly contextualise the films and learn of the actual events, or – in cases such as Pengkhianatan G30S/PKI – understand how events in the film may have been manipulated to serve a political purpose. In other words, to reach out to and educate the average reader we should beef up our articles on military-related films and other fictional works.
For many of us, this is a daunting task. The standards for film articles differ from those of history articles, and they have their own Manual of Style. The references on which we must depend are different: in many cases we must depend extensively on the popular press and audio commentary, rather than books released through academic publishers. We have to filter out the junk references – the purely gossip rags – and find quality reviews, often in leading papers. We must recognise that plot summaries do not require in-text citations, as they are assumed to be sourced to the work itself. And, perhaps the most difficult of all, we must venture into the realm of interpretation: symbolism, imagery, and intertextuality (as reported in reliable sources, naturally).
How can we help? Firstly, we have to remember that we're not alone. We can cooperate with other projects with whom there is an overlap, especially WikiProject Film. These outside writers may be more familiar with specific style guidelines, what websites and newspapers have been deemed reliable sources, and how to write sections on themes and interpretations (including terminology). We also have to familiarise ourselves with the guidelines: How can organise film articles? How long can the plot summary be? What can we use from Rotten Tomatoes and the Internet Movie Database for?
Once we're ready to write, we have to choose a subject: do we want to deal with high-profile war films, like the Academy Award winner Saving Private Ryan, or specialist films such as Janur Kuning? Each will have its own challenges and benefits, both in sourcing, interest in the article (from both readers and editors), and accessibility. Then, like for all articles, we have to do our research: watch the movie, keep our eyes open for coverage and reviews, and search for academic discussion of works. Then, it's a simple matter of applying some elbow grease and writing as we would normally, being careful to attribute opinions.
Sure, it's not going to turn out perfect every time. We'll make mistakes. That's fine. In the end, we're fighting the good fight: bringing the war to the people, for the people.
- Crisco 1492 is a Canadian student who lives in Indonesia and joined Wikipedia in 2005. He is an administrator, and has brought 11 articles, 5 lists, and numerous pictures to Featured status.
|