There you have it in its entirety which premiered 100 years ago by filmmaker dw griffith. We are going to open our phone lines as part of our reel america series. Joining us is hari jones, the curator of the African American some order civil war memorial and museum. Joining us is the author of birth of a nation. Thank you for being with us. Our phone lines are open. 20270 just how consequence are consequential was this film . In terms of film history, it was hugely consequential. It is a foundational moment in american film history. It was a breakout moment. Until then, films were 10 minutes or less. The incredibly ambitious dw griffith wanted to tell a big story in a big way and he produced this epic film employing all sorts of innovative techniques people had not seen before. This was literally americas first blockbuster film. This one sentence in your book that summarizes this film. You called it a masterpiece. You called it bigoted and slanted and set it was a dramatic flashpoint in a changing america. The film made 50 years after the end of the civil war and assassination of president lincoln. Indeed, the captures all of that. It is a film with a huge legacy in terms of filmmaking and also the Civil Rights Movement and protests. Because of its bigoted content it has been called pure evil, racist propaganda. At the time, its sparked it sparked enormous protests, especially in boston where the protests went on for plea plus three plus months and was unlike any other city. When was the first time you saw this film in its entirety . 1982. I was a freshman in college. I was prepared for the film and did a bit of studying. My professor gave us some reading to do before so i was well prepared for what i was about to see. As you look at the film today, what are your thoughts . It is very interesting the themes in the film and how consistent they are with things that are taught, like all negroes are ignorant, the construction was because of the African Americans. That kind of theme being brought forward. In fact, the reconstruction your of the films volume five of Woodrow Wilsons book, the history of the american people. That is the last chapter, volume four, which deals with the civil war. The film is consistent with what Woodrow Wilson had written in his book. Affect our new African Americans in the film the fact there are no African Americans in the film . There are white actors painted with black faces. I found that interesting as a way to keep the money circulating in the circle. I found that interesting as well. Dick lehr, was d. W. Griffith a racist . No question in my mind he was. He was adopting Thomas Dixons book the klansmen, extremely popular book. He was rabidly racist and hope letters wrote letters hoping he said he hoped anyone who saw the movie would emerge from the theater a true southern patriot. Not so obscure code for racist. Griffith was a son of the south himself. He grew up outside of louisville kentucky. His father, colonel griffith, but for the confederate straight for the confederacy. His father was a restauranteur and died in griffith was only 10. Until then, he was full of stories that came from his father about the old south and the war and this romanticized antebellum life that is imbued with racism. We began this with a one hour q and a earlier on your book. For those who missed it, can you explain why president wilson viewed this film in the white house in the east room . The viewing happened on february 18, 100 years, four days from now, ago. That happened as a personal favor to thomas dixon. Both dixon and griffith were clever marketers. Dixon had gone to college with wilson and had remained in touch as wilsons career soared, first as president of princeton and then as a president ial candidate. They remained penthouse. Penpals. When griffith was repairing to release the film preparing to release the film in early 1915, he reached out to wilson and said, can we screen this film for you . It became the first ever screening of the movie in the white house in 1915. You bookend that with last month president obama screening selma in the white house. It is a fascinating juxtaposition in my mind. Dick lehr is joining us from washington and hari jones in washington. We welcome our listeners on cspan radio heard coasttocoast. Our phone lines are open. Lets go to leroy joining us from the bronx in new york. Good afternoon. How are you doing . My question was, what was president wilsons reaction to the movie . Dick lehr, can you answer that . He was delighted by it. He thought it was terrific. As hari mentioned, much of wilsons own work of history was reflected in the film, so that played to wilsons ego. It shines a light in the story i am telling in the book with the white house and other events involving wilson, it shined a light on that side of him, the racist side of him. It was a very successful screening inside the white house. One of the interesting things that goes to griffiths cleverness and marketing skill is that the screening in the white house was supposed to be off the record. That means it was not public. Reporters were not there. Anyone that was there was family and friends of wilsons. They were not supposed to speak about it. Those were rules griffith immediately ignored. He did two things. Before the night was out, he sent a telegram to his favorite film critic, grace kingsley, at the times. That was one thing griffith put out. The other thing he did was, you asked about wilsons reaction. A line has been credited to him that he was enthralled by the film and came up with this great line about it, history written enlightening. There has been a lot of debate about whether he said that. He denied ever saying it when the screening and protests developed and it became a political hot potato for him. That is where griffith comes in. In addition to sending this telegram to grace kingsley at the l. A. Times, he later told a reporter im going to quote this from my book because it is wonderful stuff. He did not mention wilson by name, but he told a reporter the white house screening was a huge success. I was gratified when a man we all revere or ought to set it teaches history by lightning. He was pushing this line that wilson, i believe did say at the screening. Our next color is joining us from philadelphia. Good afternoon. Welcome to American History tv. Please go ahead. I would like to know how he can remain calm and collected knowing this film never should have been shown on t. V. How can he remain calm . We will go to hari jones first. I would say the most difficult moment is reading wilsons history of the american people. I can stay calm reading that so i can stay calm seeing the film. It is examining the history. This is the way people were perceiving African Americans and arguing for the clue clucks clan being the savior of the south. This was an argument being made. It was an argument made in wilsons history of the american people. I would say i stay calm in the sense that i know i have to understand this perspective and that we need to address this perspective. To be informed, i must stay calm and use my wits. We are showing the film in part because it is the 100th anniversary, because of dick lehrs book. As with all of our programming we want you to watch the event in its entirety and draw your own conclusions. Also a chance to weigh in. And share your thoughts. We are going to dan from carmichael, california. Good afternoon. Hi, there. Thanks for taking my call. Watching that film, i think it is safe to say that absolutely nothing has changed in america if that mindset still is prevalent all over the place in america. My question to you is, how much longer do you think it will take before all of us human beings can get along, meaning black and white, gay and lesbians, how much longer is it going to be . 10 years, plus or minus . 100 years, or 1000 years, plus or minus . Thank you very much. Hari jones, we begin with you. As long as we believe there are white and black people, the and not the human race the white , race, the black race, i think this problem will persist. How much longer . As long as we dont think of ourselves as human beings first. The blackwhite paradigm dominates us. As long as we are defined by the color on our skin and not the content of our character we will have this problem. How long has this film been in the Public Domain . It came out in 1915. In terms of people who want to access it on the web . We are in the internet age, digital age. You can watch all or part of this movie at any time. That is why i think, this is the 100th anniversary of the premiere of the film. One of my motivations for writing the book, frankly, was to develop a larger context of 1915 to show that this wasnt kind of a oneoff film, a that some whacked out filmmaker. Filmmaker produced. It was americas first blockbuster film. It was a reflection of the racism of the time. The sort of notions of White Supremacy that were embedded in all walks of life in 1915. You had someone like wilson, writing history that is a reflection through this racist prism. In the science of the time, and i write about this in the book in serious scientific journals were publishing studies by alleged scientists and researchers showing the size of black brains, black mens brains were smaller than white mens brains. They were debunked and it was a debate. But it was a legitimate point that was supposedly being made. History it was not just wilson. The leading historian of the time was charles dunning. The Dunning School of history. He portrayed the civil war and reconstruction in the way griffith did. I think it is important to understand the larger context. Most importantly, what moved me was not just to hear the movie was controversial and it triggered protests in various cities, snowballing, really breaking open in boston, but to tell that story in a hopefully richly detailed way that conveys to the reader that there was a good part of america, especially black america, that was appalled by this, and the idea that the klan was a Healing Force for the all the chaos and lawlessness of reconstruction. Men like Monroe Trotter, w. E. B. Dubois, were reacting very strongly in a way that, as one historian decades later said these men laid the first stone of the modern protest movement saying we are not going to stand by as this movie makes its way across america, selling out to theaters everywhere. Lets go to tony from lakewood, washington. You are next. Good morning, everyone. Just to build off the point that mr. Lehr made with regard to the scientists of the time saying that scientifically blacks were less intelligent. Those scientists are not heralded today as great scientists. The same way as this film, even though it is 100 years, it should not be heralded as a great piece of cinematic art. We dont look at propaganda from nazi germany and say it is a great piece of art. We look at it as something that was terrible for the time and therefore we dont air it on cspan or have longwinded discussions about how good the great the cinematography was. This was a propaganda film for the ku klux klan. It did a lot to damage Race Relations in america. It basically built a fire under those who were acting as terrorists against the people that lived in the south to allow them to commit terrorist acts against black people and have the government overlook it because the president at the time said this was a great piece of cinematic art and history. I really feel it is time that we stop looking at these films and saying, these are great works of art, and they were very racist and therefore it was a piece of work for the time. Really look at it and say this was a propaganda piece to further disenfranchise a group of people that were already enslaved in this country. We need to look at it for what it is. We need to stop romanticizing. Thank you for the call. We have a chance for the guests to respond. Appreciate it. Hari jones. The film is a blockbuster film. It is certainly propaganda. But a lot of the history that is written, as they have pointed out with dunnings School Wilson at princeton, dunning at columbia, the kind of history they are producing his is propaganda. This is the real problem, the propaganda of the history. In the case of William Monroe trotter and w. E. B. Dubois, one of the reasons they responded to the film and wilson is because they actually endorsed wilson in the 1912 election, even though his book had been published. They still endorsed him. This film was a real embarrassment to them as well, especially trotter. It is an embarrassment. They had gone out on a limb and say wilson is our guy. And said wilson is our guy. We supported him in the 1912 election. Here he is clearly a racist. , we will go to ann in dallas, texas. Thank you so much for putting me on. Im one of those blacks that grew up in the integrated midwest. When i moved to the south to go to a private university, i was told by whites and blacks that i spoke white. I was very offended and it was an eyeopener. I also watched the birth of a nation for the first time in college. I wonder, just like the last caller, what i am wondering is why, why are we still presenting this as a work of art when it is definitely propaganda . It is definitely propaganda. Am i right . At that time, when it came out the kkk had declined in membership and my second question is, it shows the white woman getting raped, why hasnt it ever been shown in film about how africanamerican women were constantly raped, and it was legalized by white men . I will give both of our guests a chance to respond. If you can question dw d. W. Griffith today, what would you ask him . What is your fear for the success of africanamericans . What is your greatest fear . And their financial success. Thank you very much from dallas, texas. We will go to declare for a response. We will go to declare dick lehr for a response. That question, the last one asked, what he might fear, was at the beginning of reconstruction. In the state house of South Carolina that is now controlled and dominated by exslaves and free blacks, the way he portrays that, for some reason, that is where my mind went to. I think it captures what he probably feared. He thought of blacks as being unworthy of the right to vote, of freedom. Look what happens. Their shoes are off. They are swigging whiskey chewing on chicken legs. , one of the first orders of business is to pass a law so they can legally marry a white woman. That is where my mind goes on that. I will give you a chance to respond in a minute. I will go to glenn who has been waiting from stonington, connecticut. Thank you. Interesting conversation. Picking up on the conversation just there, it was amazing to watch. You could tick off all the racist tropes as the movie went on. The reversion of history, the jim crow law, the violence of jim crow seems to be the violence of reconstruction, a complete inversion. Going tear last i would say the point, great fear is what we saw constantly through the movie the ultimate fear, the fear of white women being available to black men. You just saw it again and again and again. If you could comment on that gentlemen. Thank you. Thank you. We will go to hari jones. I keep going back to wilson. Wilson talks about this, the white men of the south being put under the heels of black men being dominated by them in the politics of the day. There is this fear of africanamericans being assertive. Wilson even says in his book that the klan was justified in attacking northern teachers because they were teaching the negro to be assertive. He is arguing it is justified to attack an innocent teacher who is simply educating someone. The consequence of that education is that person is more assertive towards whites. With wilson and griffith, what i would ask them, i would ask, do you really believe this is in the best interest of our country . Is this really in the best interest of the union . Do you really care about this nation . If you do, what will you do now to heal the wounds . Hari jones is the curator of African American them the African American civil war memorial Freedom Foundation and museum here and he has frequently been seen on the History Channel and p. B. S. Dick lehr is joining us from boston. He is a professor of journalism at boston university. His latest book is the birth of a nation. Lets go to marvin from saginaw, michigan. Good afternoon. Our last caller talked about the history of this country being skewed by basically propaganda such as this. I would like to ask one of, both the guests, how they feel about this being basically the first propaganda piece of this country. Thank you for the call. Mr. Jones . How i feel about this movie being the first propaganda piece . It is disheartening that this is the kind of work that was presented as such a cinematic blockbuster with all these innovative techniques, the longrunning film. It is disheartening that that is what actually happened. I do feel that it gives us an opportunity to examine ourselves, but also to examine not just what is in the dome what is in the film, but also what is being taught, because the film is not far off from what is being taught in the classroom. We can still examine the residual effects of it in todays classroom. Dick lehr, can you go through some fast facts about the film how long it took to put together, and why it was significant in terms of its length . He began filming on july 4 of 1914. He put together the movie in six months or so. The filming, then the postproduction, the music, editing. The length was a breakout. Three hours for an american film was much longer than an audience had ever seen before. His reconstruction in part one of the civil war battle scenes was cinematography and film sequence and action that people had never seen anything like before. To pick up the threat of an earlier question, why we play this and talk about it is as a moment in film history, as a foundational moment it is not , going to go away. It is not just a propaganda piece that just some guy put together in an ordinary way. No, this was, in terms of filmmaking, this new medium. This is the the front end of the media revolution called the feature film. This is a historic mark. So, i think some of the callers said they saw it in college. I am assuming it was a film History Survey course. That is where i first saw it in college. It is not going to go away. I th