The Woman King and its Historical Accuracy
The new movie the Woman King has opened at the #1 spot in the box office. It is an entertaining film featuring female warriors known as the Agojie. They are from Dahomey, an actual kingdom in Africa that came under French control in the late 1800s. Where the makers of the Woman King have run afoul of some scholars, however, is in their depiction of history, especially as it relates to Dahomey’s involvement in the slave trade. The movie portrays the leader of the female warriors, played by Viola Davis, as denouncing slavery. Yet this depiction of history is false. Zora Neale Hurston interviewed one of the last survivors of the slave trade in 1928. He reported the Agojie were worse than any European when it came to inhumane treatment of slaves. In other words, they were no abolitionists. Because of this historical inaccuracy, some have called for a boycott of the film. Supporters have shrugged off the criticism, citing other Hollywood movies that have played fast and loose with the facts like Gladiator. The debate is detailed by Julian Lucas in the New Yorker and Meilan Solly in the Smithsonian.
This controversy points to the politicization of history that AHA president James Sweet wrote about in his August newsletter. Sweet was critical of the establishment for its focus on more recent history and applying modern morals and ethics to historical figures. He recalled one anecdote where operators of a historical slave trading site are now presenting a sanitized version of history by ignoring the African tribe’s complicity and involvement in the slave trade to attract African American tourists. I wrote about that controversy that he became embroiled in as a result of that missive here.
The controversy surrounding the film is a fair one and leads to the question of where we should draw the line when it comes to historical inaccuracy in films. The justification that the inaccurate portrayal of the Agojie’s views on slavery are permissible because Hollywood has been a poor historian in the past seems a weak one to me. This is no better than your seventh grader whining that it’s not fair you won’t let her do something because her best friend’s parents let her do it. Yet, the line between dramatic license and historical character assassination is a fine one. Script writers have a tough job to do; they have to tell a story in a two-hour period. But it has always annoyed me that Hollywood can’t let compelling stories exist on their own terms without playing fast and loose with the facts. Computer scientist Alan Turing was made into a Soviet spy and is blackmailed by a British operative for the movie the Imitation Game. Neither event actually occurred. Similarly, in the movie Hidden Figures, Taraji Henson’s character has to walk half a mile to use the bathroom at a supposedly segregated NASA facility. But by 1958 when the movie took place, NASA was no longer segregated. The incident really occurred, just to another woman 5 years earlier in what was the agency’s predecessor. The scene makes for good filmmaking but bad history.
I think the lesson to be gleaned from this controversy is that we should go to movies to be entertained but not educated about history. Save that for watching documentaries like Ken Burns’ new documentary, America and the Holocaust. At any rate, the controversy makes for a good class discussion topic.
