From Hamilton to Bridgerton, contemporary media is inundated with new takes on historical events and people. These adaptations of classic stories and events often have a decidedly ‘modern’ flavour that was not present in earlier media of the same genre. Using the previous examples, Hamilton, the Tony Award winning musical, presents the founding fathers of the United States as people of colour rather than caucasian, as would be ‘historically accurate’. Now I don’t believe that media based on historical events or people have to be one hundred percent accurate all of the time. As Bernadette Banner, a fashion historian and YouTuber, posits in one of her videos: “There is no such thing as historical accuracy”. It is simply not feasible to be certain of every detail of a historical time period or event. So if there is no such thing as ‘historical accuracy’, why would it matter at all if something reflects its source material at all? Besides the feelings of fans and/or scholars of a historical source, what is harmed by artistic liberties? And if there is harm, is it enough to justify demanding a change?
In anecdotes, such as seen on social media, it is sometimes comical how people are influenced by popular historical media. A Facebook parent remarks on how their young child genuinely thought that George Washington, a slave-owner and first president of the United States, was a black man, as he is represented by an African-American actor in the original casting of the musical. While it’s a funny story to tell on the internet to be sure, it does again raise this question of just because we can have historical figures portrayed in media as being of a different race, nationality, sexuality, or gender, should we?
Within history and modernity, there has always been diversity; that fact cannot be argued against. And all too often people in marginalised communities have been subject to a lack of representation in popular media. By making characters in historical media represent a more diverse group of people, a more diverse crowd of viewers may be drawn to enjoy that media. As a student of history, I cannot in good conscience argue against anything that generates more interest in the subject. However we still have the question of harm. Is it harmful for those who cannot or will not take further study to have inaccurate information fed to them through popular media? Is it the responsibility of filmmakers to be as accurate as possible if they are making content based on true events? Whose responsibility is it to ensure we as a society maintain as accurate an image of the past as possible? Is it parents who show this media to their children? Or is it the teachers who teach history in a school setting?
I don’t have a clear answer to these questions, and I encourage all readers to think about the relationship between media and history. Obviously the battle for representation in popular media is far from over and will continue to be a hot-button issue in the coming years. More media should be made by, for, and about marginalised communities. I also believe that as a society we have a responsibility to encourage accurate historical education. Children of the up and coming generation should be able to witness stories about their own cultures’ history and heroes, to inspire their passion for history and continue historical tradition. But it is also important to make sure kids know that catchy hip-hop musicals and swoon-worthy regency romances may not be completely historically accurate.
Written by Abigail Marcum. Historia Copy Editor, 3rd Year English & History. Issue 14 History in Media, Autumn 2023.
Illustration by Connie Piper.
Comments