Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

--- 329:question:329--week_10_questions_comments-2024 [2024/10/31 05:07] – [Problems with historical accuracy? Errors in fact?] 76.78.172.29
+++ 329:question:329--week_10_questions_comments-2024 [2024/10/31 13:29] (current) – [How does this movie work as a primary source about the time in which it was made?] heppard
@@ Line 22: / Line 22: @@
 Matewan gets a lot right about the harsh realities of coal mining towns. Companies exploited workers, controlled their homes, and kept them indebted through company scrip. The movie highlights the real struggle of miners trying to unionize through the United Mine Workers of America while facing violent resistance from coal companies, which hired armed Baldwin-Felts agents to suppress their efforts. It also accurately shows how union organizers bridged racial and ethnic divides to unite workers, a crucial strategy for their movement. The dramatic shootout at the end of the film captures the tensions of the time, marking a turning point in the fight for workers' rights. -Sam B
+I think the film gets a lot right about the conditions and livelihood of mineworkers in the first half of the 20th century. It was hard and dangerous work, where many died and were injured. Most of the women shown in the movie are widows, showing how deadly this profession could be. The movie also highlights the monopoly these coal companies set up in a town, especially through depicting scrip as the currency compared to cash. The film also centers around the unionized nature of these coal towns. Coal miners weren’t treated fairly or compensated for how dangerous of an occupation it was. They were angry and tired, often leading to skirmishes between the union and officers hired by the mine company. The film also addresses the presence of the Baldwin Felts Agency which was a company focused on the big crackdown of workers and their ability to unionize. - Emma Galvin
+This movie is incredibly accurate as a secondary source. It’s clear through the setting (including the detail put into the town), costuming, and accurate dialects (though I’m no dialect expert; it sounds right from my untrained ears) that the makers of the film wanted to create an immersive and historically accurate movie. Something else I took notice of was how well the movie does showing the range of power the mining companies had in towns. They owned the houses, paid the miners in company credit that’s only valuable in the over-priced company stores, could easily play off local law enforcement and politicians, and more. — Allie
+As far as I could tell, this movie had little to no errors in fact other than a couple of very small things and a few fictional characters. We had discussed that this was a movie made on a budget with a small production, and you could definitely tell. However, I do think that this added to the realism of the movie. Small production depicting a small town. If the production had been larger I feel as though there would have been a larger amount of exaggeration at play here. --Emma F.
+Matewan works well as secondary source due to the fact that it effectively portrays the harsh and exploitative conditions miners faced. It details how mining companies effectively controlled miners (miners were paid in company scrip which could only be used in company stores and these items could be forcefully taken back as a result, the companies also effectively owned the land and houses these miners and their families lived in). It also is fairly accurate in depicting the reason why miners decided to unionize, as well as the harsh realities of trying to unionize against powerful mining companies during this period in time. -Vumiliya V.
+This film is historically accurate towards the act of the battle of Matewan, locale, and the overall tension between the miners rebelling against the mining corporation. Despite some of the character’s like Danny or Joe Kenehan being fictional they served important roles in dramatizing the story’s climax to draw attention to the main themes of this film. The film tackles the themes of racial solidarity and labor injustice which was not only the problem in this instance in Matewan, West Virginia, but was a prominent issue throughout the country as a whole during the 1920s. -Alex
+Because it accurately depicts the historical realities of coal mining villages and the difficult hardships miners endured in the 1920s, *Matewan* is a good secondary source. The difficult working conditions, the near-total control mining companies had over miners' life, and the miners' attempts to form a union in spite of ongoing threats are all highlighted in the movie. The miners were caught in social and financial traps, as evidenced by details such as company-owned housing and company scrip, which restricted their purchases to company-owned establishments.-Ryan K
+As said before, Matewan did a detailed job of portraying the hold that the company had over these people’s lives. Starting right in the beginning, the viewer could see that almost everything the workers and families depended on to survive (food, shelter, clothing) were owned by the Coal Company. The film depicted how normal it was for there to be accidents in the mine, as well as how many miners would die each year. There were many details that those people in the town weren’t aware of, like how the company brought in Italian and black workers whilst evicting former workers. This was done to cause turmoil among them after the company was hearing rumors of possible Union gatherings. Another way the company/agency was able to stay ahead of the workers was by implanting a spy in the mix, which did actually happen as well. Overall, this has been one of the few films we’ve watched so far that has focused more on the real people and events that occurred in real life, instead of showcasing movie stars. -Matt S
+This film gets many things right. One is that the company did try to unlawfully remove miner families from their homes and the sheriff & mayor were able to stop them as they didn't have a warrant. Another thing this film got right was how difficult it was for miner families to survive and they had to work together to survive. -Maddy W
+I believe Matewan is fairly historically accurate. It showed the harsh condition and the poverty that miners often faced. In the early 20th century, mined in dangerous working conditions, had long hours, and there were no safety protocols in place for them. So often, miners would get hurt or even sometimes death.  It also portrays how miners were divided and union unity was hindered by coal companies exploitation of ethnic and race tensions. (Hannah E.)
 ====== Problems with historical accuracy? Errors in fact? ======
@@ Line 27: / Line 46: @@
 While Matewan brings the coal miners' struggle to life, it simplifies and dramatizes some historical details. Characters like union organizer Joe Kenehan are fictional composites, and real-life figures like Sid Hatfield are portrayed with a heroic aura that history does not fully support. The shootout is mostly accurate but staged to feel like a more balanced showdown than the skirmish it likely was. The film also leaves out some of the long-term effects of the massacre, which continued to fuel labor resistance. While the movie emphasizes racial unity among the miners, in reality, bridging those divides would have been a lot more complicated than what was shown. -Sam B
+Matewan did a fair job of representing the events that occurred, but as any movie would, they changed parts of the real story for dramatic effect. For example, the timeline was stretched out. The events that actually happened only spanned over a day, starting with the 2 men from the agency getting there early in the morning to them trying to leave for the train until the shootout. In the movie, these events were made to seem like these events lasted days or even weeks. Furthermore, lots of the characters portrayed were real people, but the directors added a couple fictional characters for the narrative. For example, Joe Kenehan and Danny Radnor were both fictional, used to help unite the union/miners. Adding Kenehan made it seem as though the miners weren’t super familiar with the making of a union, but in reality they knew unions well and didn’t need an outsider to help them. -Matt S
 ====== How does the film’s overall interpretation(s) deviate from scholarly historical sources? ======
 Overall, this movie does a good job staying pretty accurate to the real-life experiences that were depicted in the primary sources. The brutality of the mines, the ages of the miners and the helplessness they felt, were things I all saw in the movie. I felt that the movie erred on the side of too nice (although I was glad for it, I don't want to watch 12 year olds die on screen), but the feelings were there. The desperation the people of Matewan felt is something I saw reflected in the primary sources. I do feel though, that the representation of African Americans in this film left something to be decided. Though they were a presence in the film, I felt that there could have been a little more focus on the problems they were dealing with, especially when put in comparison with the sources. It was more than just fair wages, it was the right to the same spaces and treatment as other employees. - Caty
 ====== How does this movie work as a primary source about the time in which it was made? ======
+This movie was not only depicting a historical event (which they did very well), but was also making a statement about the treatment of workers and unions in the 80s as well. Labor unions were being weakened, companies were putting more emphasis on profit rather than customer satisfaction, and working hours were being extended. All of this didn’t improve when the stock market crashed later in 1987, just two months after this film was released. --Emma F.
+This movie works as a primary source because in the 80s there were a lot of anti-union perspectives including the president. So this movie tries to counter these by being sympathetic to the miners. -Maddy W
+Matewan was made in 1987, during which there were a lot of economic shifts and the union started to weaken. This movie reflects these changes with showing the abuse of miner companies as well union solidary. (Hannah E.)
 ====== The "So What" Question ======
@@ Line 50: / Line 76: @@
 This movie is very important because it shows a part of history that is unknown or forgotten by many Americans. It brings to light the labor struggles and the fight for workers' rights in the early 20th century, particularly in the context of the coal miners' strikes in West Virginia. the film emphasizes the harsh realities of exploitation and the courage to stand up against corporate interests.the Matewan can be a very educational movie about that time - jedidia k
+Through watching this film, it was definitely made as a passion project. It highlighted an era of history not many people know or realize. Mine work was hard and the only movie I’ve seen that centers around miners is October Sky, which even then doesn’t highlight the struggles of mining to the same degree. This movie can be used as a way to teach people about unions and mine conditions. When learning about unions, it’s often through the lens of inner city factory work and only learn about it during the height of industrialization. This movie shows that unions and strikes happened throughout the U.S. and not just in cities. I think this movie also stands out from other films made at this time, one because the topic matter is unique, and because it’s relatively accurate, something less commonly achieved in the 1980s. It highlights that a story can be intriguing and interesting while also being accurate, which a lot of other directors and movie makers think isn’t the case. - Emma Galvin
+Unfortunately, labor history is rarely, if ever, taught in history classes. When it is taught, it’s often very broadly discussed and with many of the uncomfortable details removed. Combine that with living in an era where most adults have grown comfortable in these protections, like those in the coal miner wars, because they can’t remember a time before them, and it becomes quite easy to take such protections for granted. This movie shows the grim reality laborers faced for decades and forces the audience to think more critically about the purpose of unionizing and worker/labor protections. — Allie
+The film was very impactful and I believe it's important that it got made due to the fact that it sheds light on a moment in history in which many people may not know or may not think much about. Like many others, I wasn't aware as to the extreme nature of the exploitive practices and dangerous conditions miners had to go through and it was an eye-opening experience. Even though the film ends in a union defeat, the film is essential in showcasing the vital role of unions and why they are necessary, especially when it comes to advocating for safe working conditions and workers rights in general. -Vumiliya V.
+The reason why we should care about the particular issues in this movie that was brought into light is that these are still problems in today’s society. The movie focuses more towards equality in terms of workers’ rights, however racial matters are still prevalent today whether it be from housing, education, or even healthcare are disproportionately affecting minorities. The shooting of Matewan displays how our country overall needs to work together to make fair and equal work environments within our communities in order to positively influence our society. -Alex
+Matewan is an important film because it illuminates the early 20th century struggles of coal miners, a lesser-known chapter of American labor history. It depicts the harsh conditions and limited freedoms rural laborers experienced to achieve labor rights, reminding us of their sacrifices. Although not popular, its National Film Registry designation highlights its cultural and historical significance.-Ryan K