The American Experience is the longest running and most watched history series on television. Ever a thorough series, they now bring us "New York Underground." This hour long documentary is a fairly detailed history lesson of New York City´s subway transit system. Writer and producer, Elena Mannes, covers all the bases, social, scientific, and some historical significance of this engineering feat.
The documentary starts out with a discussion of the traffic and street congestion of New York in the early 1800s. The increasing number of immigrants and the ever growing economy, which brought in droves of people, created a dramatic need for breathing space. The pioneer, and failed entrepreneur Alfred Ely Beach, the man who built the first subway in New York, is discussed first. His triumphs and downfall set the tone for the New York industrial spirit.
But it is no surprise that Beach´s subway was a failure due to the political corruption of Boss Tweed. It was not until a blizzard in 1888 that political corruption could be overcome. Mayor Abram S. Hewit, the mayor with the idea, August Belmont, the president of the Interborough Rapid Transit System, and William Barkley Parsons, the man who was in charge of building the subway, finally broke through the corruption and skepticism in the 1890s to build New York´s great savior of transit.
With the contract to build the subway finally signed in 1900, construction began and was initially finished on October 27, 1904. The expansion of the subway continued though, and after years of difficulty and danger, the construction has never really stopped.
There are no surprises here. This documentary is patterned fairly closely with the usual PBS documentary—illustrations, historical photographs/footage, and interviews all mixed together. This is not the best of the American Experience series. This topic seems to have a fairly niche audience. The appeal is really limited to those who live in New York, ride the subway, love engineering history, or love PBS documentaries.
The main problem of the documentary is the myopic nature of the historical narrative. I have to admit, I don´t really care all that much about New York. I´m not from the east coast; I have few east coast sympathies and often tire of the New York bias of news and entertainment. Why do a documentary about New York´s subway? Boston had a major subway years before they built one in New York. But this fact is merely glossed over in this piece. There is a sense that one gets from these documentaries that New York´s history is so much more important than the history of the rest of the United States.
There are a number of moments in this piece that the engineering, the working conditions, and even the art of subway design are touched on, but all too much this is a celebration of New York City, and specifically the New York visionaries attached to this project. I wished that this documentary would have given the viewer more of why New York City´s subway should be the subject of a documentary. Why is it more special than other American subways? There is no real concrete reasoning for highlighting this achievement over other similar engineering achievements. Was the New York City subway faster than all the others—is it the electricity? How did it compare? This is the myopia that I speak of. When we talk about New York City in general what are we really talking about? I´ve never been there, so I don´t know. It would have been nice if this documentary would have told me.
But with all this said, "New York Underground," is still head and shoulders above more commercial fair. The History Channel´s "Modern Marvels," barely compares. Cable documentaries have less depth and often lack the polished nature of public television´s documentaries. As much as I might have concerns with some elements of this documentary, if I were going to teach a lesson on New York City´s subway, I´d use this film. It touches all aspects of the construction, the regular people, the major figures, the economic, the political, and some of the technical.
The documentary starts out with a discussion of the traffic and street congestion of New York in the early 1800s. The increasing number of immigrants and the ever growing economy, which brought in droves of people, created a dramatic need for breathing space. The pioneer, and failed entrepreneur Alfred Ely Beach, the man who built the first subway in New York, is discussed first. His triumphs and downfall set the tone for the New York industrial spirit.
But it is no surprise that Beach´s subway was a failure due to the political corruption of Boss Tweed. It was not until a blizzard in 1888 that political corruption could be overcome. Mayor Abram S. Hewit, the mayor with the idea, August Belmont, the president of the Interborough Rapid Transit System, and William Barkley Parsons, the man who was in charge of building the subway, finally broke through the corruption and skepticism in the 1890s to build New York´s great savior of transit.
With the contract to build the subway finally signed in 1900, construction began and was initially finished on October 27, 1904. The expansion of the subway continued though, and after years of difficulty and danger, the construction has never really stopped.
There are no surprises here. This documentary is patterned fairly closely with the usual PBS documentary—illustrations, historical photographs/footage, and interviews all mixed together. This is not the best of the American Experience series. This topic seems to have a fairly niche audience. The appeal is really limited to those who live in New York, ride the subway, love engineering history, or love PBS documentaries.
The main problem of the documentary is the myopic nature of the historical narrative. I have to admit, I don´t really care all that much about New York. I´m not from the east coast; I have few east coast sympathies and often tire of the New York bias of news and entertainment. Why do a documentary about New York´s subway? Boston had a major subway years before they built one in New York. But this fact is merely glossed over in this piece. There is a sense that one gets from these documentaries that New York´s history is so much more important than the history of the rest of the United States.
There are a number of moments in this piece that the engineering, the working conditions, and even the art of subway design are touched on, but all too much this is a celebration of New York City, and specifically the New York visionaries attached to this project. I wished that this documentary would have given the viewer more of why New York City´s subway should be the subject of a documentary. Why is it more special than other American subways? There is no real concrete reasoning for highlighting this achievement over other similar engineering achievements. Was the New York City subway faster than all the others—is it the electricity? How did it compare? This is the myopia that I speak of. When we talk about New York City in general what are we really talking about? I´ve never been there, so I don´t know. It would have been nice if this documentary would have told me.
But with all this said, "New York Underground," is still head and shoulders above more commercial fair. The History Channel´s "Modern Marvels," barely compares. Cable documentaries have less depth and often lack the polished nature of public television´s documentaries. As much as I might have concerns with some elements of this documentary, if I were going to teach a lesson on New York City´s subway, I´d use this film. It touches all aspects of the construction, the regular people, the major figures, the economic, the political, and some of the technical.
The American Experience is the longest running and most watched history series on television. Ever a thorough series, they now bring us "New York Underground." This hour long documentary is a fairly detailed history lesson of New York City´s subway transit system. Writer and producer, Elena Mannes, covers all the bases, social, scientific, and some historical significance of this engineering feat.
The documentary starts out with a discussion of the traffic and street congestion of New York in the early 1800s. The increasing number of immigrants and the ever growing economy, which brought in droves of people, created a dramatic need for breathing space. The pioneer, and failed entrepreneur Alfred Ely Beach, the man who built the first subway in New York, is discussed first. His triumphs and downfall set the tone for the New York industrial spirit.
But it is no surprise that Beach´s subway was a failure due to the political corruption of Boss Tweed. It was not until a blizzard in 1888 that political corruption could be overcome. Mayor Abram S. Hewit, the mayor with the idea, August Belmont, the president of the Interborough Rapid Transit System, and William Barkley Parsons, the man who was in charge of building the subway, finally broke through the corruption and skepticism in the 1890s to build New York´s great savior of transit.
With the contract to build the subway finally signed in 1900, construction began and was initially finished on October 27, 1904. The expansion of the subway continued though, and after years of difficulty and danger, the construction has never really stopped.
There are no surprises here. This documentary is patterned fairly closely with the usual PBS documentary—illustrations, historical photographs/footage, and interviews all mixed together. This is not the best of the American Experience series. This topic seems to have a fairly niche audience. The appeal is really limited to those who live in New York, ride the subway, love engineering history, or love PBS documentaries.
The main problem of the documentary is the myopic nature of the historical narrative. I have to admit, I don´t really care all that much about New York. I´m not from the east coast; I have few east coast sympathies and often tire of the New York bias of news and entertainment. Why do a documentary about New York´s subway? Boston had a major subway years before they built one in New York. But this fact is merely glossed over in this piece. There is a sense that one gets from these documentaries that New York´s history is so much more important than the history of the rest of the United States.
There are a number of moments in this piece that the engineering, the working conditions, and even the art of subway design are touched on, but all too much this is a celebration of New York City, and specifically the New York visionaries attached to this project. I wished that this documentary would have given the viewer more of why New York City´s subway should be the subject of a documentary. Why is it more special than other American subways? There is no real concrete reasoning for highlighting this achievement over other similar engineering achievements. Was the New York City subway faster than all the others—is it the electricity? How did it compare? This is the myopia that I speak of. When we talk about New York City in general what are we really talking about? I´ve never been there, so I don´t know. It would have been nice if this documentary would have told me.
But with all this said, "New York Underground," is still head and shoulders above more commercial fair. The History Channel´s "Modern Marvels," barely compares. Cable documentaries have less depth and often lack the polished nature of public television´s documentaries. As much as I might have concerns with some elements of this documentary, if I were going to teach a lesson on New York City´s subway, I´d use this film. It touches all aspects of the construction, the regular people, the major figures, the economic, the political, and some of the technical.
The documentary starts out with a discussion of the traffic and street congestion of New York in the early 1800s. The increasing number of immigrants and the ever growing economy, which brought in droves of people, created a dramatic need for breathing space. The pioneer, and failed entrepreneur Alfred Ely Beach, the man who built the first subway in New York, is discussed first. His triumphs and downfall set the tone for the New York industrial spirit.
But it is no surprise that Beach´s subway was a failure due to the political corruption of Boss Tweed. It was not until a blizzard in 1888 that political corruption could be overcome. Mayor Abram S. Hewit, the mayor with the idea, August Belmont, the president of the Interborough Rapid Transit System, and William Barkley Parsons, the man who was in charge of building the subway, finally broke through the corruption and skepticism in the 1890s to build New York´s great savior of transit.
With the contract to build the subway finally signed in 1900, construction began and was initially finished on October 27, 1904. The expansion of the subway continued though, and after years of difficulty and danger, the construction has never really stopped.
There are no surprises here. This documentary is patterned fairly closely with the usual PBS documentary—illustrations, historical photographs/footage, and interviews all mixed together. This is not the best of the American Experience series. This topic seems to have a fairly niche audience. The appeal is really limited to those who live in New York, ride the subway, love engineering history, or love PBS documentaries.
The main problem of the documentary is the myopic nature of the historical narrative. I have to admit, I don´t really care all that much about New York. I´m not from the east coast; I have few east coast sympathies and often tire of the New York bias of news and entertainment. Why do a documentary about New York´s subway? Boston had a major subway years before they built one in New York. But this fact is merely glossed over in this piece. There is a sense that one gets from these documentaries that New York´s history is so much more important than the history of the rest of the United States.
There are a number of moments in this piece that the engineering, the working conditions, and even the art of subway design are touched on, but all too much this is a celebration of New York City, and specifically the New York visionaries attached to this project. I wished that this documentary would have given the viewer more of why New York City´s subway should be the subject of a documentary. Why is it more special than other American subways? There is no real concrete reasoning for highlighting this achievement over other similar engineering achievements. Was the New York City subway faster than all the others—is it the electricity? How did it compare? This is the myopia that I speak of. When we talk about New York City in general what are we really talking about? I´ve never been there, so I don´t know. It would have been nice if this documentary would have told me.
But with all this said, "New York Underground," is still head and shoulders above more commercial fair. The History Channel´s "Modern Marvels," barely compares. Cable documentaries have less depth and often lack the polished nature of public television´s documentaries. As much as I might have concerns with some elements of this documentary, if I were going to teach a lesson on New York City´s subway, I´d use this film. It touches all aspects of the construction, the regular people, the major figures, the economic, the political, and some of the technical.
No comments:
Post a Comment