Legacy Magazine

Timothy P. Townsend

The opportunity to produce a new interpretive film in the National Park Service doesn’t come up very often. So when Lincoln Home National Historic Site was provided with the funds for a new film, we were excited about the project but at the same time conscious of the importance of what we were undertaking. We had one shot at this and whatever the final product, it would be shown for years to come to hundreds of thousands of visitors. We knew that this film would be around for a while because it was replacing a film that was produced in 1976. We were going to produce a digital, high-definition film to replace one that was shown on a 16mm film tree. (Thank goodness for both the opening of the high-tech Abraham Lincoln Presidential Museum several blocks away and a Lincoln bicentennial to help get our need noticed and funded!)

This posted promoted Lincoln Home National Historic Site’s interpretive film Abraham Lincoln: A Journey to Greatness, which premiered in February 2009, just in time for the Lincoln bicentennial.

Lincoln Home National Historic Site preserves and interprets the Springfield home of Abraham Lincoln. It is the home that he, his wife Mary, and nine-month-old son Robert moved into in the spring of 1844 and where they lived for the next 17 years. It is the home that saw the birth of their next three sons, Eddie, Willie, and Tad. And it is the place where three-year-old Eddie died of tuberculosis. It was where Lincoln lived while earning a living as a successful attorney. It was where he lived during the famous Lincoln-Douglas debates of 1858; where he lived when he gave his famous Cooper Union Speech in New York; where the Republican Party informed Lincoln, in May 1860, that he was their candidate for the presidency; and, where president-elect Lincoln was when South Carolina seceded from the Union. The Lincoln home itself is restored to the 1860 time period and contains a mix of original and period artifacts throughout the two-story house. Lincoln Home National Historic Site contains 14 historic structures that surround the Lincoln home, evoking the Lincoln time period for visitors.

One challenge in telling the story of Abraham Lincoln in Springfield is deciding which story to tell. Do we present the story of Lincoln the family man? Lincoln the lawyer? Lincoln the politician? President-elect Lincoln on the eve of civil war? And, if we try to combine any or all of those elements, how do we do it within the time allotted for a typical visitor center orientation film? Our 2004 long-range interpretive plan provided some guidance, including our interpretive themes, but no specifics:

The goal of this 15-minute program will be to inspire, excite, and motivate visitors to the very personal connections between Lincoln the man, his family, home, community, and belief system as they relate to major events in America’s history.

In Mr. Lincoln’s Springfield, a photographer played by Stuart Germain tells viewers about Lincoln’s hometown.

An inquiry of our staff was helpful, but still brought a variety of responses based upon the areas of the Lincoln story that most interested them. Ultimately, the solution lay in developing a rule of thumb that helped in a variety of instances throughout the film project. Consult the experts, then trust the process! We were fortunate in our project to have the benefit of the expertise of the staff of the National Park Service’s Harpers Ferry Center, the office that produces and/or coordinates most media projects for the National Park Service. Harpers Ferry Center managed the film contract, which included providing a list of filmmakers that had already been vetted through their indefinite quantities contract process. Harpers Ferry Center staff spent many hours reviewing proposals and submittals from many filmmakers who wanted to be on the National Park Service “IDIQ” list. So, who are we, as historic site staff with no particular background in film making, to question the abilities of the experts who have been determined to be the best in their field? Through guidance from our Midwest Regional Office and Harpers Ferry we selected an excellent filmmaker.

We then provided the filmmaker with a great deal of background material on Lincoln in Springfield and, with our guidance—including our interpretive themes, etc.—we had them develop a film plan that they felt could be accomplished within the given time frame and within the available budget, and that would be compelling to the visitor. The filmmakers had two advantages: They knew how to make a compelling film and they were not Lincoln experts. They knew what a “non-Lincoln” person would be interested in because they were in that group. It is relatively easy to reach an audience who already appreciates Lincoln; we need to reach those who don’t. For that reason, you probably would prefer not to have a Lincoln historian make a Lincoln film. Serve as a consultant, yes; drive the story, perhaps not. While there were certainly some back-and-forth discussions on elements of the story, we ended up for the most part with the outline they envisioned. We also avoided the pitfall of wanting to primarily tell the story of the place that we manage, the Lincoln home, to the possible exclusion of a better broader Lincoln story, a story that more visitors could connect to. And, ultimately, visitors will connect more to the Lincoln home if they can better connect to Lincoln. The final product was a film that told a balanced, multifaceted story of Lincoln in Springfield.

In a Lincoln-Douglas debate scene from Abraham Lincoln: A Journey to Greatness, Stephen A. Douglas was played by Rick Dunham and Abraham Lincoln was played by Fritz Klein.

Letting the filmmakers ply their craft freely wasn’t always easy, however. The trick for us was to know when to step in to make some corrections and when to remain silent for the sake of the story. For example, does it really matter that, in a scene showing Eddie’s death, the wallpaper design in the background is a little too late for that time period? Or is it the feel of the room and the emotion of the scene that is most important? We kept quiet on the wallpaper issue. In staging the Lincoln-Douglas debate, the filmmaker wanted to show a “historic” building in the background because it “looked better.” We knew that the building was too modern, that in most cases the debates were held in open areas, and that this change was relatively easy. We held firm on that issue.

Another consideration on this project was limitations due to budget constraints. On February 11, 1861, Lincoln gave his famous farewell speech to the citizens of Springfield. In 2007, because we could only afford one trip to Springfield for filming, our Lincoln gave his speech in August. The result was a rather green leafy February in our film. We were able to “hide August” somewhat thanks to the magic of computer graphics, which populated the scene with buildings to mask some of the leafy trees and grass, but not all. Again, the ultimate goal was a portrayal of Lincoln’s emotional farewell to Springfield on his way to the presidency.

While we let the filmmakers tell the story, we ensured that the film was reflective of current scholarship and interpretation, in this case, interpretation of antebellum American society and the causes of the Civil War. This was certainly one of the areas in which our old film really looked old. Our 1976 film, Mr. Lincoln’s Springfield, was set in Springfield just after Lincoln’s election and features a “photographer” who takes us into the Lincoln home and around Springfield, and while taking photos, describes the Lincoln family and the Springfield community that they live in. In his description of Springfield, the photographer summarizes Springfield’s African-American community in only four sentences.

Just down the street is Jessie Jenkins’ place. His wife takes in laundry, he drives the dray wagon. He took the Lincolns to the depot when they left. Then there’s William Floureville, he, like Jessie, is black.

And, while someone viewing the film would learn about Lincoln’s family, see his home, and know that he was elected to the presidency, the viewer does not get even the slightest indication that there was a growing national crisis over slavery, that it was that issue that propelled Lincoln to the White House and the nation to war.

In the new film, we mention the diversity of Springfield but leave a more in-depth discussion of that to our exhibits and other media. We do devote a good deal of film time to the national issues and debate over slavery. We have a scene from the 1858 Lincoln-Douglas debates that illustrates the extreme views of the nation through the use of Stephen A. Douglas’s more inflammatory rhetoric about the place of African Americans in the nation.

I hold that a negro is not and never ought to be a citizen of the United States. I hold that this government was made on the white basis, by white men, for white men and their posterity forever.

There was some hesitation about inclusion of this line in the film—namely a concern that some in the audience might take offense. A problem of past National Park Service media such as exhibits and films was the sanitation of certain elements of history for the sake of visitors’ sensitivity. National Park Service media at historic sites and museums now include uncomfortable chapters of the past to tell a better, more accurate, and more compelling story.

Ultimately, the success of our film, Abraham Lincoln: A Journey to Greatness, can be largely attributed to open dialogue, trust, and true partnerships with the filmmaker, the local community, and the National Park Service community in every step of the filmmaking process, from location scouting to final editing. We hope that this film doesn’t have to be shown for as many years as its predecessor did, but if it does, we think that the visitor will be well informed and entertained.

Timothy P. Townsend is a historian at the Lincoln Home National Historic Site. Contact him at tim_townsend@nps.gov.

Stephanie R. Lewis

A storyteller uses whatever method is available and relevant.

On paper, I am a television producer. But my job at the Arkansas Educational Television Network (AETN) entails much more than leading a production crew. I am tasked with researching a subject, creating a project around it, and deciding what formats would best convey the information. Sound familiar?

Textbooks tend to lose their audiences rather quickly, especially when those audiences are tech-savvy and want more visual information. For the sake of keeping students, and sometimes teachers, from nodding off in third-period history class, I get to interpret Arkansas’s past and present by producing videos and virtual tours for those classrooms. Long gone are the days of the old frame-by-frame, crank-it-yourself filmstrip. Documentaries and instructional presentations that are broadcast or streamed online make learning more enjoyable and easily consumed.

Video

Arkansas’s First People features an interview with a Choctaw Nation elder in Antlers, Oklahoma. Courtesy of Arkansas Educational Television Network

In public television and some cable networks, video featuring curriculum-based subjects is created specifically for education and scheduled outside of the primetime lineup meant for the general public. These schedules, usually overnight, allow for odd lengths in programming, like 10- or 15-minute clips on whatever subject fits with a teacher’s lesson plan.

One of my first projects for AETN was a series of classroom video clips, funded in part by the Arkansas Environmental Federation (AEF), eventually named “Environmental Educator’s Book.” I worked with scientists, business people, and one teacher, but I had to guard against losing sight of my audience, middle school students. That age group has enough complexity in its collective life without having to memorize dry statistics about water, air, recycling, and energy. So, animation seemed like a good format.

AETN and AEF wanted videos that would be fun and colorful, short and informative. Each clip has a character or characters who explain what the subjects are and why a teenager should care. The animation is mixed with live-action video so that the realism doesn’t get lost. The resulting clips are different lengths and teacher’s guides are available.

Arkansas’s First People’s chief videographer Chuck Durham shoots video of an Osage Nation storefront in Pawhuska, Oklahoma. Courtesy of Arkansas Educational Television Network

Long-form video projects are an interpretive challenge. Unlike an interpretive talk, where each time you present, you can tweak something and improve, video is concrete. You have one chance at telling the story. Once it’s fixed in the final edit, that’s it. Like a lot of things, there are the “would’ve, should’ve, could’ve” moments. Suddenly, you realize that a particular emphasis or image would make the video much better. Maybe lack of time or budget prevented those additions. On the other hand, the video that was created will probably be seen by thousands of people.

Virtual Tours
The Internet has really enhanced interpreting to the masses. Virtual tours can be a primer for a visit to a site, an electronic field trip, or both. For a teacher, this is invaluable. Lesson plans benefit from the addition of images and information. The school’s budget may benefit from giving students the chance to experience a place without having to spend money on transportation. For the park or museum, its services are being utilized and in the future, the site might be visited when school funds are available.

The first virtual tour I had the pleasure of working on was about the Little Rock Central High segregation crisis. The project became a website, not just a virtual tour. Touring a Time: Little Rock Central High School 1957 Crisis features what is now the former visitor center, the high school campus, as well as the neighborhood, timeline, key players, historic images, and documents. The site is linked to the Little Rock Central High School National Historic Site lesson plan page through the National Park Service.

The original idea for the virtual tour was to provide a glimpse into the past with words and images. There is no video involved. The narrative in some areas reflects the vernacular of the time. Students’ thoughts are shared through journalism class assignments. Propaganda examples show the tension in the community. Each biographical sketch has a notation of where each of the Little Rock Nine ended up after 1957. This is the closest to living history as a producer can get without donning a costume.

Courses
Teachers are required to have a specific number of professional development credit hours. My job is centered on providing course video for Arkansas teachers via Arkansas Internet Delivered Education for Arkansas Schools (Arkansas IDEAS). Recently, it has evolved into building courses with video, assessment questions, and any other materials that would enhance the subject. At first glance, this may not sound like interpreting, but it is. The courses are transferred to the students either by a teacher improving his or her skills or by literally using the course elements in classroom lesson plans.

Arkansas’s First People is a good example of a course. This project began as a grant application on its way to the garbage can until a coworker, who knew of my interest in Native cultures, rescued it and brought it to me. I made my case for applying for the grant and completing the project as a course. There was an absence of extensive material in Arkansas history classes regarding indigenous people. I received permission to apply. Three of us formed a grant team, applied, and received one of 15 positions in the “American Experience: We Shall Remain Native History of America Community Coalitions Initiative.”

Arkansas’s First People would include five half-hour videos centering on various time periods, a website, virtual tours, resource links, outreach events, an exhibit, and assessments. AETN would provide these elements with the guidance of a coalition of experts—and I knew that didn’t mean some books and a historian. I contacted the modern nations of the American Indian tribes who impacted what is now known as Arkansas. The majority of nations responded and allowed us to visit their Oklahoma headquarters. Also on the list of invited experts were the Arkansas Archeological Survey, Arkansas State Parks, Arkansas Tech University Museum, Historic Arkansas Museum, Sequoyah National Research Center, American Indian Center of Arkansas, Trail of Tears Association, and the University of Arkansas Museum Collection. All of these organizations would have some part in the completion of this massive, delicate project.

As I looked at the scope of Arkansas’s First People, I thought back to my two seasons as an interpreter at Toltec Mounds Archeological State Park. Two things stood out: These are stories to be handled with the utmost respect, and information should come from as close to the original source as possible.

When you are interpreting a site, you work diligently on your presentations, whether they are print, audio-visual, or first-person. You do careful research and craft the story with respect. You typically know your audience.

To interpret for mass media, you work diligently on your presentations, perform careful research, and craft the story with respect. You don’t always know your audience when the stories you are attempting to tell are fractured by scattered documentation, mishandling, and bias. These stories aren’t your own. This seemingly ancient history still impacts the living. An American Indian author friend of mine told me to stick to the basic principles I learned at Toltec. Arkansas’s First People resulted in all the elements promised in the grant application and was also edited into a 90-minute broadcast documentary. No project has had more of an impact on me as a producer or interpreter.

Pros and Cons
There are two downsides to being a television producer and not a frontline interpreter: Your audiences don’t get to have a tactile experience with what you produced as they would if they visited a site, and you typically don’t get to meet your audience. On the positive side, you produced something that can be seen multiple times and at the audience’s convenience.

I used to think that I wasn’t an interpreter because I wasn’t at a park. Then thanks to my former Toltec Mounds Archeological State Park co-worker Shea Lewis, I thought better of it. During production of Arkansas’s First People, he said, “I can’t wait to see the end product. You know you are still an interpreter, just on TV!”

Stephanie R. Lewis is an education producer at the Arkansas Educational Television Network and a freelance writer/photographer. She can be reached at srlewis@hotmail.com.