THE BIRTH OF A NATION is a film that comes to us laden with controversy. And while I tried to watch it and assess it purely on its own terms, for reasons I will go on to explain, this was impossible. Accordingly, it’s hard to defend this as an objective review of a work of art - rather, it’s a summation of my thoughts on the work and its political context.
THE BIRTH OF A NATION is itself a provocative title for a film. It refers, of course, to D.W.Griffiths’ film, released a century ago. That silent film told the story of a noble Southern family who suffered during the Civil War, and a protagonist who joined the Ku Klux Klan to keep his sweetheart safe from the ravening predatory bestial freed slaves. The film - which I watched earlier this year at the BFI Southbank - is disturbingly good. Like watching a good production of Wagner’s Ring, you find yourself swept up in the artistry and carried along in a wave of emotion in spite of your awareness of the noxious political beliefs held by the creator and woven into the fabric of the work. In the case of the Griffiths’ film, the infamous presidential review - that it is “history written in lightning”, holds true. The images of gallant knights riding to rescue fair maidens of burning crucifixes - of a young heroine jumping to her death to avoid rape - these remain potent symbols. Great art moves people and BIRTH OF A NATION moved them to join the KKK and cemented and exacerbated prejudices. It’s simultaneously a technically brilliant and horrifying film.
