A History of Britain (BBC miniseries) review
Content
A History of Britain
(2000)
Quite naturally I was drawn to the subject matter, being a semi-Anglophile, but I‟d never heard of the series before, as, well, sometimes I have my head in a bucket and miss out on things. I‟m always up for a good “history of” series (it‟s the other half of my „never thought about getting a job in college‟ double major), and as the BBC was involved, I expected this to be better than the usual dumbed-down History Channel offerings (and it was). The show is the brainchild of Brit historian Simon Schama, whose distinctive voice guides us through the series; he wrote it and serves as on- and off-screen narrator to a few thousand years of British history, and it‟s his engaging take on the subject matter that renders it fresh and fascinating anew. Schama covers the history of the UK from the Neolithic age through to 1965, ending with the death of Winston Churchill, an interesting endpoint, as that was arguably the last high-water mark that England enjoyed, culturally and historically. The series is divided into fifteen episodes, and I was concerned when, by the end of the first disc (episode 3), we had already reached Richard and John (c. 1200); but Schama explores issues of cultural as well as historical significance – there‟s an entire episode on the slave trade, as well as an extremely informative hour on the British presence in India. Scotland and Ireland get a great deal of screen time too. Schama‟s a natural narrator, one of those rare people who can make history come alive by imbuing it with immediacy and humanity; most people think of history as a dull recitation of facts, but with Schama we feel as if we get to know Elizabeth (the first) as a person as well as a ruler; that we see the human side (if there was one) to Cromwell; and his juxtaposition in the final episode of Churchill‟s life with George Orwell‟s is superbly masterful. It doesn‟t hurt that there‟s a lot of gorgeous location shooting, showing off some of the great mansions and ancient fields where the history he‟s discussing actually took place; but the most important factor in this series is Schama himself. By choosing such a personal approach to the material, he creates a sense of familiarity and accessibility that is rare (but welcome) in these types of shows. It‟s as if he‟s sitting there talking directly to you – not at you, like so many historians, but to you – while the two of you stroll around the countryside discussing the Roundheads or Bonne Prince Charlie. Simply put, this is the way history should be – smart, fun, and engaging. Schama‟s not always complimentary, either – he‟s not afraid to admit when England got it wrong, like with Scotland, America, India, the Industrial Revolution, and so on; and this tendency to highlight the bad with the good makes the series even more enjoyable and refreshing. His structure for the series – most episodes after the first two or three tend to center around one central event or theme, usually contrasting two important figures involved – is smartly configured. Elizabeth is thrown into sharper focus by Mary, Queen of Scots, as Cromwell is by Charles. As before, nowhere does this work better than in the finale, where Churchill‟s determination clashes with Orwell‟s criticism – and yet, it‟s clear, both men loved
England, or at least their conception of it (much has been said and written of these two men, and yet, I‟ve never gotten a better sense of either than in watching this show). Obviously, fifteen hours is a time commitment, about the same amount of time as a whole season of hour-long dramas; but this is time exceptionally well spent if you have even a passing interest in the subject matter, and indeed, this series is a benchmark for how this sort of thing should be done (only The World at War was better, and, well, you‟d be damned hard pressed to surpass that). The only downside to watching this series is that it will be hard to go back to the usual braindead approach the History Channel takes (they co-sponsored this but had nothing to do with the content), but one should hardly apologize for finding hot dogs unappetizing after having caviar. This is a brilliant series, well worth the time investment; it‟s history that you‟ll enjoy as well as learn from, the way it should be, really. June 3, 2012
(2000)
Quite naturally I was drawn to the subject matter, being a semi-Anglophile, but I‟d never heard of the series before, as, well, sometimes I have my head in a bucket and miss out on things. I‟m always up for a good “history of” series (it‟s the other half of my „never thought about getting a job in college‟ double major), and as the BBC was involved, I expected this to be better than the usual dumbed-down History Channel offerings (and it was). The show is the brainchild of Brit historian Simon Schama, whose distinctive voice guides us through the series; he wrote it and serves as on- and off-screen narrator to a few thousand years of British history, and it‟s his engaging take on the subject matter that renders it fresh and fascinating anew. Schama covers the history of the UK from the Neolithic age through to 1965, ending with the death of Winston Churchill, an interesting endpoint, as that was arguably the last high-water mark that England enjoyed, culturally and historically. The series is divided into fifteen episodes, and I was concerned when, by the end of the first disc (episode 3), we had already reached Richard and John (c. 1200); but Schama explores issues of cultural as well as historical significance – there‟s an entire episode on the slave trade, as well as an extremely informative hour on the British presence in India. Scotland and Ireland get a great deal of screen time too. Schama‟s a natural narrator, one of those rare people who can make history come alive by imbuing it with immediacy and humanity; most people think of history as a dull recitation of facts, but with Schama we feel as if we get to know Elizabeth (the first) as a person as well as a ruler; that we see the human side (if there was one) to Cromwell; and his juxtaposition in the final episode of Churchill‟s life with George Orwell‟s is superbly masterful. It doesn‟t hurt that there‟s a lot of gorgeous location shooting, showing off some of the great mansions and ancient fields where the history he‟s discussing actually took place; but the most important factor in this series is Schama himself. By choosing such a personal approach to the material, he creates a sense of familiarity and accessibility that is rare (but welcome) in these types of shows. It‟s as if he‟s sitting there talking directly to you – not at you, like so many historians, but to you – while the two of you stroll around the countryside discussing the Roundheads or Bonne Prince Charlie. Simply put, this is the way history should be – smart, fun, and engaging. Schama‟s not always complimentary, either – he‟s not afraid to admit when England got it wrong, like with Scotland, America, India, the Industrial Revolution, and so on; and this tendency to highlight the bad with the good makes the series even more enjoyable and refreshing. His structure for the series – most episodes after the first two or three tend to center around one central event or theme, usually contrasting two important figures involved – is smartly configured. Elizabeth is thrown into sharper focus by Mary, Queen of Scots, as Cromwell is by Charles. As before, nowhere does this work better than in the finale, where Churchill‟s determination clashes with Orwell‟s criticism – and yet, it‟s clear, both men loved
England, or at least their conception of it (much has been said and written of these two men, and yet, I‟ve never gotten a better sense of either than in watching this show). Obviously, fifteen hours is a time commitment, about the same amount of time as a whole season of hour-long dramas; but this is time exceptionally well spent if you have even a passing interest in the subject matter, and indeed, this series is a benchmark for how this sort of thing should be done (only The World at War was better, and, well, you‟d be damned hard pressed to surpass that). The only downside to watching this series is that it will be hard to go back to the usual braindead approach the History Channel takes (they co-sponsored this but had nothing to do with the content), but one should hardly apologize for finding hot dogs unappetizing after having caviar. This is a brilliant series, well worth the time investment; it‟s history that you‟ll enjoy as well as learn from, the way it should be, really. June 3, 2012
