For decades, scholars and non-academics alike have been trying to bring history to the public through television. Obscure documentaries are shown frequently on PBS stations across the country, while those who consider themselves “too cool” for PBS can choose to indulge their history cravings from the more mainstream menu of the History Channel. The demographic to which stations like PBS and the History Channel cater, however, is still not as vast as it could be; these channels require a television-owning audience, for example (and cable-subscribing in the case of the History Channel), and their reputation is still largely one of nerdiness. A more truly “public” way of promoting history through video and documentary should allow viewers to watch via a convenient mode without the attachment of the “history nerd” stigma.
Cue Derek Waters, a young actor and producer who happens to have a passion for history in addition to filmmaking. In 2007, Waters decided to combine his love of history with his love of drinking, and began filming his friends discussing topics in history–while drunk. The experiment subsequently evolved into Drunk History, a series of short films narrating historical events that originated as web videos and are now appearing on HBO.
Drunk History is a genuinely vernacular form of public history that appeals to a younger audience who, though perhaps interested in history, is not necessarily inclined to watch a lengthy, cerebral documentary. Anyone with an internet connection and five minutes to spare can access these videos, which feature drunk but enthusiastically knowledgeable narrators describing historical events that are simultaneously interpreted by well-known actors such as Jack Black and Don Cheadle. The fact that famous actors—and drinking—are involved is sure to attract a wide audience who would be indifferent to less of a popular approach to history. (There is certainly no “nerdy” stigma attached to watching this type of historical interpretation.) Moreover, the language employed is casual, to say the least, and as far from convoluted academic jargon as it could be.
While the historical facts included in the videos may not be the most detailed or, in some cases, even completely accurate, the videos serve as inspiration for further research into the event or topic narrated. More importantly, they make history—and the process of retelling it—appear trendy, which seems to be Waters’ objective in producing the videos.
The public itself is not involved in the project (although ordinary people with passion for history are the ones who narrate the videos). However, the idea has spawned various imitations on YouTube, and will no doubt continue to do so as it gains popularity. While historians may balk at the idea of conveying inebriated interpretations of important historical events, the use of accessible internet videos could surely be an asset to public historians aspiring to provoke widespread interest in history. Even without the drunken aspect, the short, entertaining film approach could be adapted for museums, mobile walking tours, or publicity purposes. It may not always be possible to achieve, but having a notable celebrity appear in a video advertising some important historical event or aspect of your city would be fantastic publicity to elicit widespread public interest. Who wouldn’t want to watch Jack Black dressed as a Basque sheepherder recounting Boise history?
Sources:
An article on the Drunk History project: http://kqed.info/arts/movies/article.jsp?essid=29121
An interview with Drunk History’s creator: http://news.tubefilter.tv/2008/10/02/derek-waters-offers-up-a-history-lesson-with-a-side-of-beer/
Drunk History’s YouTube Channel: http://www.youtube.com/user/DrunkHistory
This is awesome, Anna, and is so much more interesting than the interpretive sign project I wrote about. Unlike most public history projects ‘drunk history’ doesn’t completely drain history of its sense of fun. Public history is likely best done by creative people like Derek Waters whose livelihoods don’t depend on what they create. Having interested amateurs doing public history (or professonals who have not lost touch their historical fascination and curiosity) might be more likely to result in the production of projects with broad public appeal.
I completely agree, and not just because this was also my idea. =) Now I have to find something new! Well played…
This is one of my favorite public history projects, too. I showed episodes to my History 111 and undergrad public history seminar, and–as you might imagine–they were exceptionally well-received. My favorite is the one about Oney Judd. (Hiccup!)
The ones about Oney and Lincoln/Douglass are so fantastic in my opinion because they are not just drunk history–they’re drunk REVISIONIST history. The portrayals of George Washington as a conniving racist jerk, and Lincoln as a “white man’s president,” are priceless.