Difference between revisions of "329--Week 10 Questions/Comments"
From McClurken Wiki
(→5 Other movies/questions of style/framing/storyline) |
(→b Inaccurate/issues:) |
||
| Line 72: | Line 72: | ||
The biggest problem with ''Matewan'' is probably the lack of a larger national context. There isn’t much mention of the other parts of America going through the same struggles, which gives the sense that the strike in Matewan is somehow unique. In fact, I don’t think they even uttered the name United Mine Workers of America. Perhaps it makes the movie stronger in that it focuses on the interworkings and interrelationships of a small community, but it feels almost like Matewan exists in a bubble. Also, there is the issue of the fictional outsider, Joe Kenehan, who comes to bring his message of hope and economic justice and essentially “clean up” the town by spreading ideas of passive resistance and equality and what not. It almost plays like some Western movies (a la ''My Darling Clementine''), but not quite, as it’s clear that Joe’s efforts didn’t really succeed. There are also a lot of issues that aren’t covered, as things in Matewan didn’t end with the massacre. I didn’t feel like Danny gave much of a conclusion at the end of the movie that portrayed the continuing conflict. --Taylor Brann | The biggest problem with ''Matewan'' is probably the lack of a larger national context. There isn’t much mention of the other parts of America going through the same struggles, which gives the sense that the strike in Matewan is somehow unique. In fact, I don’t think they even uttered the name United Mine Workers of America. Perhaps it makes the movie stronger in that it focuses on the interworkings and interrelationships of a small community, but it feels almost like Matewan exists in a bubble. Also, there is the issue of the fictional outsider, Joe Kenehan, who comes to bring his message of hope and economic justice and essentially “clean up” the town by spreading ideas of passive resistance and equality and what not. It almost plays like some Western movies (a la ''My Darling Clementine''), but not quite, as it’s clear that Joe’s efforts didn’t really succeed. There are also a lot of issues that aren’t covered, as things in Matewan didn’t end with the massacre. I didn’t feel like Danny gave much of a conclusion at the end of the movie that portrayed the continuing conflict. --Taylor Brann | ||
| + | |||
| + | To add to Taylor's point, the only reference to a national labor movement was the fictional character Joe, who was supposed to serve as its representative. Several times in the movie, Joe made reference to what "the Union" had to say on the issue of the strike at Matewan - how the people were supposed to wait for further instruction while the big national guys decided their next move. Well, in the movie, the local workers of Matewan were initially very excited about the prospect of joining a union and being part of a bigger movement (eluded to when the initial leader/ Baldwin Felts spy proclaims to have been a union man all his life). When Joe gives the workers the wait and see speech, after they all followed his advice and joined the union at great personal risk, all the workers felt betrayed and ostracized him, held meetings without him and even plotted his assassination. Now, to what extent did a backlash actually occur against national union organizers? I got the impression from class and the readings the union leaders were highly regarded - Buster Ratliff cites the UMWA president John L. Lewis as delivering him from slavery, so it was odd to see such local animosity against the outside union man. | ||
== 2 Film's relationship to current scholarship or to primary sources from the time == | == 2 Film's relationship to current scholarship or to primary sources from the time == | ||
