Presenting the Black Past - How History Must Change the Media

14/11/2013

Less than eight minutes into Juliet Gardiner's programme, Presenting the Past, How the Media Changes History on Radio 4, I had to press pause and start tweeting yesterday.

She said that as a historical advisor on Atonement (2007), there was a decision that had made her uneasy- the depiction of a black soldier appearing with Robbie in Dunkirk. She asserts: "In fact, it was almost impossible for there to have been a black soldier in the British Expeditionary Force in France". She suspects this was done "to reflect today's multicultural society" and "gave a misleading impression of how Britain was at the time". Screenplay by Christopher Hamilton- explains it away as colour-blind casting, but says "it probably wasn't accurate". This element of the film did prompt discussion at the time, in the Guardian and the Spectator. And Gardiner herself responded to questions, commenting "statistically one would expect there to have been a handful of black soldiers scooped up by the Military Services Act, and one or two of those may have been sent to France with the BEF"- a statement which seems quite contradictory to what she says on her Radio 4 programme. I'm no expert on the 20th century, but I've seen plenty of pictures of black soldiers in both world wars- not just African Americans, or even Imperial troops, but British-born men too, as you can see from this online exhibition from the Ministry of Defence, this slideshow from Phil Gregory of the Black Presence website, and Tony Warner's recent talks at the Imperial War Museum. Surely, even if there wasn't a huge number of black soldiers in the BEF at the beginning of the war, showing one in Atonement makes the larger point that there were black soldiers in World War 2, in the same way as the Lancastria was co-opted to represent many smaller ships that sunk at Dunkirk.

But where I really had to press pause in shock was when Tim Bevan, producer of Elizabeth (1998) as well as Atonement, commented "had that [casting a black actor] taken place in our Elizabeth movie, you wouldn't have been able to prove that, at all, and it would have been interpretative". This is a film which has no problem placing it's own dramatic interpretation on various other historical events- showing the queen sleeping with Robert Dudley, for example- something that really is unprovable. (See Alex von Tunzelman's unpicking of the film on her Guardian Reel History blog). But I'd like to pick up Bevan's gauntlet now, just in case he's planning a third Elizabeth film to follow Elizabeth: The Golden Age (2007). If he ever wants to cast a black actor in a Tudor film (or indeed a Stuart or a Georgian one): I can prove it for him! In my research into Africans in Britain, 1500-1640 for my Oxford D.Phil. thesis I found evidence of over 360 Africans living in England and Scotland during the period. (Oh, please, someone make a film set in the court of James IV of Scotland, featuring the "More Tabronar"). More specifically, there is clear evidence that Elizabeth I had at least one African servant at her court. Records survive from 1574 and 1575 showing her ordering clothes for a "lytle Blackamoore" from her tailor. Further to this, a painting known as "Elizabeth I at Kenilworth" shows her being entertained by a small troupe of black musicians. This was in keeping with a wider trend of Africans working at royal and aristocratic courts across Europe. However, it would equally be accurate to show Africans walking about in Tudor crowd scenes. The most interesting recent attempt to show this was in Dr. Who, The Shakespeare Code (2007). But that's another story (and another blog?).

For now, I just want to end by saying that as historians, we have to work harder to ensure that the Media doesn't Change History, but History Changes the Media. This is a two-way street, but we need to do our bit (by blogging, for example!) to ensure new research is fed into the media. The BBC Radio 3/ AHRC collaboration New Generation Thinkers initiative is a great example of how this can work in practice. Let's have more of that!

You can read yesterday's Twitter discussion on this with @jessicammoody, @cath_fletcher, @michael1952 and @HistoryNeedsYou on Storify.

28 Comments

Michael Ohajuru link

13/11/2013 07:41:29 pm

Excellent rhetoric. A well argued, polemical response to the blatant ignorance of those people on the program, they need to get their facts right or equally come out into the real world. Black people did not suddenly appear with the Windrush in the 50's, they have, and the records (and Miranda!) show that they have been here for a long, long time time.

Jane Draycott

13/11/2013 08:08:00 pm

I've been watching Band of Brothers with my partner recently (his choice, not mine). In the episode 'Bastogne' there is a black woman working as a nurse in the Army hospital. When a character expresses surprise at this, another nurse (white, French) explains that she's come all the way from the Congo because she wanted to help, and that was the end of that. I thought it was an interesting choice on Steven Spielberg's part, as while there is a certain amount of diversity in the soldiers presented (amongst the American troops there are Americans of Irish, Italian, German, Hispanic etc extraction), there aren't any black speaking characters.

Dave Andress

16/11/2013 10:37:06 pm

That's because the US Army in WW2 WAS officially racially-segregated; most frontline combat units contained no Black soldiers, and most Black soldiers drafted found themselves in supply and transportation units - like the famous 'Red Ball Express":
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_history_of_African_Americans#World_War_II
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Ball_Express

Jason de Souza

23/7/2015 03:10:51 pm

This is the black nurse, as of 2015, she's still alive: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Augusta_Chiwy

The other nurse was Belgian, not French:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Renee_Lemaire

Jason de Souza

23/7/2015 03:04:42 pm

Empire Windrush arrived at Tilbury in 1948, not during the 50s. Apart from that, I completely agree with your comments.

Robert Sharpe

12/6/2017 01:34:40 am

I am highly suspicious about the way so many black characters are now appearing in historical dramas. For example, you can look through thousands of photographs of British troops in World War One and not see a black face. How is it, then, that nowadays blacks keep popping up all over the place in TV productions set in that conflict?

Recognize

29/7/2017 06:00:27 am

I find interesting how so many people complain about diversity. You obviously do not know your history. WW1 had a large amount of Black soldiers from Senegal, Kenya, South Africa, Congo, East Africa, North Africa, France, Canada,Australia, New Zealand, America, Egypt, England, Jamaica, Barbados, The Whole of the Caribbean. The reason they are popping up know is because the history books wrote them out so it looked like an all white affair so now they're having to retell history as it actually happened.

Juliet Gardiner link

15/11/2013 04:14:24 am

I did not suggest that there were no black soldiers fighting on the Allied side in the Second World War only that after rigorous checking with the IWM there is no evidence that there were any black soldiers with the BEF in France in May 1940 - though there were both US and UK black soldiers fighting later in the war.

`Of course I didn't imagine that black people sprung from nowhere and there were no black people in Britain until SS Windrush arrived in 1948 `(not the 50s`)bringing Afro Caribbeans many of whom had flown with the RAF during the war. `As editor of History Today I published an issue on 'Blacks in Britain' in 1982 with chapters by several distinguished historians expert in this field back to the 16th century i recall. This publication is still referenced today. As a historian I try to be precise and specific and if anyone can produce incontrovertible evidence of a black soldier on the beach at Dunkirk, I should be most interested to hear of it. I would recommend reading `Stephen Bourne's book The Motherland Calls if you have not already done so, though he has never come across any record of black soldiers at Dunkirk For women, nurses, munitions workers, caterers etc there is West Indian Women at War by Jocelyn Barrow. - Juliet Gardiner

Miranda Kaufmann link

17/11/2013 07:37:00 pm

Thank you so much for your response Juliet. And, belatedly, for publishing the brilliant 1981 special issue of History Today (Vol 31, issue 9: http://www.historytoday.com/archive/history-today/1981/volume-31-issue-9).

Re: Atonement, my point was, if it's ok to sink the Lancastria a few weeks earlier to make a film more dramatic, why is it not also ok to "bend the truth" to make the wider point that there were many soldiers of African descent fighting in World War Two?

But my main problem was that you didn't modifyor qualify Tim Bevan's comment regarding the impossiblity of proving a black presence in Elizabethan England- a presence you were aware of, thanks to your work on the History Today special issue.

Those listening to the programme who did not have specialist knowledge of this area would be left with the impression that any black actors they saw in films set pre-1948 were a result of colour-blind casting and that there was not a pre-20th century black presence in Britain.

This is exactly the sort of oversight that the BBC should strive to avoid, especially in the context of recent discussion about what the broadcaster can do to serve black audiences (Radio 4 Media show, 23rd October: http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b03dv385), and the wider debate on the absence of this history in the national curriculum- see my Times Opinion article here: http://www.mirandakaufmann.com/timesopinion-we-need-mary-seacole-as-well-as-queen-mary.html
and this blog on the "Our Island Story" version of history: http://www.mirandakaufmann.com/3/post/2012/11/our-island-story-what-history-should-we-teach-our-children.html

Happy to continue this discussion further...

Michael Ohajuru link

15/11/2013 04:15:50 pm

I was saddened to read the reply from the program’s presenter, what she missed is the fact that my indignation was rooted in her program's claims about the black presence in two British Histories; at Dunkirk - ‘almost impossible’ for there to have been a black presence and during Elizabethan times – no proof of a black presence.

The media continuously reminds and confirms me of the possible roles or functions I as a black person, and people like me, can have in society through the stereotypes it creates. Reminding me of the things they believe I as a black person can do and cannot do, in doing so confirm and sustain their self-created stereotypes.

Here was the media, through this presenter and her guests, once again saying what and what not a black person could do, specifically it was ‘almost impossible’ for a black person to have an ancestor at Dunkirk or equally a family history dating back to Elizabethan times.

I would argue while it is almost impossible one can equally say it is remotely possible.

In her reply she fires a reasoned and rational broadside of supporting facts to defend her position, I’ve no doubt the presenter is well meaning and her facts are well researched and accurate, with a wealth of references, but she misses my point completely.

I was educated with a British history told with the presenter’s ‘accuracy and authority’ which most times excluded black people, where it did choose to include black people, their role or function was specifically defined.

I as a black person want to be considered as a possibility not dismissed as an impossibility, no matter how remote the former.

I as a black person want the opportunity to be considered, the presenter denies me, and people like me, that opportunity.

I as a black person, am looking to a British history which is inclusive, not exclusive, of people like me, a history in which black children can see possibilities - not impossibilities - for themselves and their family and friends: not being ignored; not having to fight to be considered and certainly not being told ‘it’s almost impossible.’

Ron liebermann

4/6/2018 05:31:40 pm

Why do you keep saying "as a black person"? Do you think that this confers upon you some special claim to authority or victimhood? It doesn't. Personally, i think that blacks are very ungrateful for what they have been given. You are demanding respect, without showing any. White men gave black people everything they have. Teach your children that lesson first.

Matthew Ward - HistoryNeedsYou link

17/11/2013 10:02:33 pm

It is vital for people to see their own faces in history so that it I'd their story not the others. There is no need to crowbar diversity into history as it has always been there. What has been lacking has been the recognition and sharing of this history.

There were Indian and African personnel involved in a Operation Dynamo at Dunkirk in the Summer of 1940. The Indian Army Service Corps served with distinction - please refer to this web page from the CWGC

http://www.cwgc.org/foreverindia/stories/men-of-royal-indian-army.php

The French Army included African soldiers who stood and fought bravely for little recognition. I am also looking through the BEF lists for Black British soldiers and I have no doubt that I will find them.

Juliet Gardiner link

18/11/2013 12:18:48 am

Matthew I shall be interested to hear if you find a soldier who can be identified as black when you look through the lists of soldiers in the BEF on the Dunkirk beach in 1940 since I could not, and tell me precisely in what way they were involved in Operation Dynamo though was what portrayed in Atonement was one incident specifically on the beach at Dunkirk. The soldier portrayed as not Indian and though Indians played a hugely significant role in the Second World War it was usually as part of their own Company or Regiment as your message in fact indicates JUliet

Clifford Pereira

18/11/2013 04:09:28 am

In the last five years I have been to a number of Commonwealth countries and have noted a trend especially among the "White Commonwealth". Here in Vancouver, Canada and in Sydney Australia there are the following a popular views: 1) That Indians, Africans and West Indians were not involved in WWI. 2) That only white soldiers, sailors and airmen "defended the motherland". 3) That the Japanese were our enemies. 4) That WWI only took place in Europe, and 5) That this is why people of Asians or African origin are not really Canadian or Australian. These perceptions are clearly all wrong (my own great grandfather - born in Portuguese-India was at the first RN engagement of the war). However people are allowed to think in this way because imperial and later national narratives have set out to exclude the role of Asian and African people for their own White Australia and Canada needs. Memories of WWI are fading as the generation who witnessed the horrors have passed away. In the absence of personal testimonies from survivors, there is no challenge to the truth. It is the responsibility of historians to remind and engage in the heritage sector including museums and media, that another story needs to be told. The lack of inclusiveness, leads to exclusion for thousands of people around the world. Without such inclusiveness, be it for a rather negative aspect of human history, many people are treated and feel always the outsider. It was A WORLD WAR and it was a shared experience. Not just the war of Britons and the British descendants. This is the point, and this is why the presence of a Black soldier at Dunkirk is important.

William Scates frances link

18/11/2013 06:24:11 am

As a historian there can be a tendency to aggressively combat what one sees as anachronism. The dramatic presentation of the past is itself inherently an anachronistic endeavour.

Therefore it is odd for a historian to focus on one aspect of that selective and dramatic representation of the past as being problematic, when, if we were to be consistent, the entire project would arguably be condemned on those grounds.

It is therefore completely appropriate that the license taken with history for the sake of drama be also applied to inclusive casting in light of historians' history of writing exclusionary and selective histories... something partly behind the indignation that you'll see when black actors are put in Elizabethan sets.

That the nitpicking appears in regards to race is telling.

Tony Warner link

20/11/2013 10:24:16 pm

Given that there were black soldiers fighting for Britain since the 1790’s and up to and beyond World War 1, I don’t see why it’s such a stretch to think that there may have been just one on the Dunkirk beaches. Therefore I could forgive the inclusion of a single black man on the off chance that there may actually have been one
Of course it would be great to have definitive evidence but given the fact that mainstream media/BBC routinely ignore mountains of archive evidence that black people were present in England’s past ( insert any BBC produced period/costume drama Elizabethan or otherwise since 1936 ) why not take a risk to even the balance ? One ‘Small Island’ with Naomie Harris (2009) is not enough.
Even when the evidence that there is an 50% African/Caribbean/Asian presence in boroughs like Tower Hamlets, Newham, Hackney is easily visible , their on screen presence in Eastenders is eviscerated down to one family at a time as opposed to half the cast. Why this deliberate misrepresentation, when the proof is literally in front of the eyes not locked up in a dusty archive?
The fact is that thousands of school children and indeed adults are routinely amazed when shown photographs of African/Caribbean fighter and bomber pilots even though those pictures are almost 70 years old and are easily obtainable from the quoted Imperial War Museum. This is because a variety of producers, writers, researchers and directors have chosen not to remember this history whether there was evidence of not. The same thing happens every remembrance day when those images are somehow left out of the national media memory of this period.
So bearing this in mind and the infamous Brian True-May dictate which informed the Midsomer Murders all white casting, maybe we should err on the side of diversity when it comes to World War 2 in general.

*West Indian Women at War was written by Ben Bousquet and Brian Douglas published by Lawrence and Wishart in 1991

Ghee Bowman link

4/3/2014 07:16:43 pm

Two companies (around 600 men) of the Royal Indian Army Service Corps were evacuated from Dunkirk - on the 25th and 29th May. I have yet to find any record of them in accounts of Operation Dynamo and Dunkirk, or in photos.

I have heard of Black Britons in the BEF, including Trooper Joseph Small of the 10th Hussars, killed on the Seine on June 10th and another (name unknown by me) in the Duke of Wellington's Regiment.

'Atonement' was interesting in that it chose to put the Black soldier as a main character, rather than in the background.

As historians, I think we have a duty to remember that things were seen differently then. A forgotten story may have been forgotten for a variety of reasons. It may have been because of racism. It's also possible that one or two black soldiers simply weren't noticed, among 330,000 British and French.

Ghee Bowman link

4/3/2014 07:19:56 pm

As an addition, here's a thread that I got some of this info from:
http://ww2talk.com/forums/topic/36137-black-british-soldiers/page-2

Ghee Bowman link

4/3/2014 07:25:38 pm

As an addition, here's a thread that I got some of this info from:
http://ww2talk.com/forums/topic/36137-black-british-soldiers/page-2

Ghee Bowman link

4/3/2014 07:34:35 pm

As an addition, here's a thread that I got some of this info from:
http://ww2talk.com/forums/topic/36137-black-british-soldiers/page-2

Ghee Bowman link

4/3/2014 07:37:21 pm

As an addition, here's a thread that I got some of this info from:
http://ww2talk.com/forums/topic/36137-black-british-soldiers/page-2

Brian Machin

10/7/2014 03:44:58 am

I made the post on WW2Talk that Ghee Bowman refers to. I think there appears to be a difference between Juliet Gardiner's assertion - which I'm happy with, that 'after rigorous checking with the IWM there is no evidence that there were any black soldiers with the BEF in France in May 1940". and the actual situation - i.e. that the IWM don't and can't know that simply because race is not identifiable by surname alone. One of the first things I did when starting to research Trooper Small's death (he was a relative of my wife) was contact the IWM and I drew a complete and utter blank about Black British soldiers. The Army Museum were more helpful and pointed out that the British Army did not segregate British born soldiers by race (They were very much more circumspect about officers). Black Britons like everybody else were subject to the exigencies of the Military Training Act and the National Service (Armed Forces) Act of 1939 - namely that they had to register as available for military service. Joe Small was called up, fought and died like hundreds of thousands of others. That isn't to say that his experience of the army was the same; not segregating isn't not discriminating, but black Britons have always been recruited into the army and checking with the IWM seems like a pretty narrow form of research to find Black British soldiers.

Alan Law

31/10/2014 09:08:12 am

The entertainment industry, often takes outrageous liberties with history. Elizabeth the Golden Age has the Armada being burnt. In fact, when attacked by fireships, the Spanish cut their cables and fled. Spectacular cinema but not history. Sometimes the changes are artistic and dramatic licence as in the straight trenches used in War Horse for Joey to run along. Other times they are unnacceptable as in The Patriot and Brave heart. The worst thing is people's unquestioning belief.
But then historians can make free with history. Try convincing an American that the US lost the war of 1812.
I have become fascinated by the black history of Britain. Much is new to me and fills a gap in my knowledge. So thanks to Miranda Kaufman & others. At school I was taught about famous white Britons including women. I wish I had learned about Mary Seacole. How about a statue of Mary Seacole for the fourth plinth?

Ghee Bowman

2/4/2015 12:11:45 am

There's a photo of a Black soldier with the BEF at the Imperial War Museum. It's number F4252, and he's a member of the Palestinian Pioneer corps, photographed on 1st May 1940

Brian Machin

2/4/2015 01:17:17 am

Always interested to hear of pictures of black soldiers - in 7 or 8 years I have maybe a dozen pictures of black British servicemen from various sources, not all named. Plus another dozen unconfirmed references to Black British soldiers fighting. The policy of the British government in 1939-40 was to enlist non-white volunteers from the colonies in non-combat roles; -pioneers and 'labour' battalions, foresters, and other support roles. Africans, Arabs and Jews from Palestine enlisted in the Pioneer Companies were often referred to as Alien Companies and could consist of many varied nationalities.

Ghee Bowman

2/4/2015 01:35:55 am

Interesting, Brian. I'll keep my eyes open for such photos. I'll be back in the IWM next week, so I'll let you know.

Clifford Pereira

2/4/2015 03:08:30 am

The story of "Pioneer Companies" from Cyprus and Iraq are covered in the book I wrote "The View from Shooters Hill". The book is out of print and in any case was commissioned by an amalgam of 6 community groups in Bexley, headed by BACCA. But you can get it on inter-library loan.

Clifford Pereira

2/4/2015 03:05:27 am

An update.
My investigation into the involvement of Asians in Canadian forces in World War One has netted some interesting results. I had just found the records of Sikhs from British Columbia in the Canadian forces (including the Western Front), when I was invited to a great exhibition hosted by the Sikh community in Abbotsford Sikh Gurdwara on the very same subject. Remember at the time the British Columbian government did not allow Asians to serve in its forces.
My work on Asians in the Navy, has been far more astounding. The official Royal Canadian Navy in the Pacific, had just one slow ship (The Rainbow). So the ships of the Canadian Pacific fleet were placed at the disposal of the British Admiralty, and these ships employed literally hundreds of Asians (Chinese from Hong Kong, British Indians and Goans from Portuguese India). Thanks to the Sea Power Centre in Australia, I confirmed that the ships were engaged in the Indian Ocean, including at Aden against the Ottomans. This was upheld when I traced the headstones (thank you CWGC) of two Chinese seamen in Sri Lanka and had them photographed for me by the Sri Lanka Underwater Archaeology group. By the way the South Asians were awarded medals by the Admiralty. But all attempts at getting Canadians to even consider this has drawn a blank. Why? Canadian history and media are embedded in the past and its "White Canada" episode, that has excluded both aboriginal and Asian narratives, and this is what the media (which has poor historical research skills) keeps repeating, perpetuating the myth of White Canada.

Presenting the Black Past - How History Must Change the Media

Leave a Reply.

Author

Related Blogs/Sites

Categories

Archives