Roanoke Times
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: SATURDAY, June 25, 1994 TAG: 9407220015
SECTION: SPECTATOR PAGE: 16 EDITION: METRO
SOURCE: BOB THOMAS ASSOCIATED PRESS
DATELINE: LOS ANGELES LENGTH: Medium
``It's sort of like `the sun never sets on the British Empire,''' Burns says of the documentary, which joined the era's photographs with letters of the time to illuminate the nation's most tragic years.
When his 11-hour film appeared on PBS on five successive nights in September 1991, it proved a milestone for the network and a leap forward for all documentary makers. And also a boon to the country's history teachers.
``The Civil War'' begins another five-night stand on Sunday (at 8 p.m. on WBRA-Channel 15). It might be called a warmup for ``Baseball,'' a whopping 181/2-hour Burns miniseries beginning Sept. 18 on PBS.
Despite his youthful appearance, Ken Burns is a documentary veteran who won acclaim for his films about the Brooklyn Bridge, the Shakers, Huey Long, the Statue of Liberty and Thomas Hart Benton.
Then ``The Civil War'' brought him celebrity status.
He interrupted the editing of ``Baseball'' at his studio in Walpole, N.H., for a telephone interview.
Q: You call ``Baseball'' a sequel to ``The Civil War.'' How so?
A: It's a history of the country that the Civil War made. Baseball is the metaphor. I've been interested in the Civil War and the question of who are we as a people. History is really the pursuit of that very personal question.
There are many ways to deepen our appreciation of that question of who are we. One is by studying our political narrative, of which by far the Civil War is the most important event. The other is studying our social behavior. There are very few things that are a constant throughout our history. Baseball is one of them.
Q: Is it safe to say ``The Civil War'' changed your life?
A: Most definitely. It makes me happy that I live in Walpole, N.H. I made the choice 11 years before "The Civil War" came out, but it's helped to insulate me a little bit from the kind of celebrity that has attended to [the film].
Most documentary filmmakers take a vow of poverty, and I certainly did that when I began. Having a kind of recognition is really satisfying. I think it's also a kind of nutritional celebrity that I've enjoyed. Americans are tired of being served up the kind of junk food that is normally television and film fare.
Q: Are there some bothersome aspects?
A: Not so much, because I do live isolated, not in New York or Los Angeles. Somebody told me that in approaching me, people just want to finish a conversation they think they've already been having. That's a very flattering and wonderful dialogue to be involved in.
Q: Would you change anything in ``The Civil War'' if you could?
A: No. I see things that I don't like sometimes, but I don't hold onto that. I love my film the way a parent loves a child. That's why it's impossible to name my favorite film when people ask me. It's like asking a parent, ``Which is your favorite child?''
Q: Have you heard of or seen material you wish you had in the film?
A: All the time. That happens in every film I've made. You see a photograph or hear of a first-person quote. But there's not a regret. You don't look at your child and say, ``Gee, I wish he had blond hair instead of dark hair.''
Q: Hasn't ``The Civil War'' helped all documentary filmmakers?
A: I think that it has. It has reminded people that: A, the documentary is not dead; B, that it is an art form, it doesn't merely have to be journalistic; C, that it doesn't have to be balanced. I think people assume that balance means mediocrity.
I think it's possible to drink in, in the case of ``The Civil War,'' the tragic story of a complex American family and get to know Southerners as well as Northerners.
Q: What did you think of the abortive move by the Motion Picture Academy to eliminate the documentary in the awards?
A: I'm disappointed. I think we have to remember that the Academy is in the business of honoring its industry, which is about the creation of commercial, dramatic films. It has every right to celebrate what it does. However, it has included the documentary for more than 30 years (actually the category started in 1941). It should continue. It's a good way of reminding people that nonfiction films can be just as dramatic as fiction films.
Q: Would you ever attempt a fiction film?
A: I'm actually developing an idea. But I don't think at all that it's something I have to do. The subject matter that I mine - American history - is so inexhaustible that I could spend 10 lifetimes and never exhaust it. And [the subjects] would be as dramatic as a feature film, as I think my documentaries have shown. I'm thrilled that more people have been drawn into making them. If my films are the cause of that, that's great.
by CNB