Keith LeBlanc kl953314
August 2015
Page 4
Assignment 1
Reaction/Analysis Paper:
A Time for Burning
August, 2015
This documentary film, released in 1967, has been praised for its effort to describe, in a small localized setting, the difficulties in dealing with racial segregation in the USA just following the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and related federal legislation. In a technical sense, the film is a good example of the “cinéma vérité” [1] technique then employed mainly by certain European directors. For example, there was no professional cast, and no script produced to guide the filming and audio. The majority of the camera work appeared to be hand-held. It was released as a black & white production. No typical artificial lighting was used, even indoors.
The film was acclaimed and won the 1968 Academy Award for “Best Documentary”.
The setting for the film is Omaha, Nebraska in 1966, and it revolves around a local church congregation, the Augustana Lutheran Church. The film was commissioned by the Lutheran Church of America, a national organization. The fact that the film employs the example of an organized local religious congregation and its approaches to the issues is significant, as one would expect a more sympathetic atmosphere for seeking social change in such a setting. However, this was not to be, and the film leaves the viewers with the definite impression that integration will not be embraced by the good members of the Augustana congregation.
Did the film uncover new ground? No.
The fact that President Eisenhower had to reluctantly use US military forces to protect nine black students in Alabama in 1957 was representative of major protests throughout the South against federal intervention related to integration in public schools. In the mid-fifties and later, there were the Montgomery, Alabama bus rider protests, the large scale marches in Selma, Alabama, and other mass protests. Federal efforts to remove barriers to integration were still seen as unconstitutional by states-rights advocates.
By the time this film was released (1967), the U. S. was experiencing increasingly violent strife between the races, based on demands by the black population for more equality and actual reductions in social and economic imbalance in all areas of life.
The rapidly growing effort by US to intervene in the war between North and South Vietnam was another negative addition to social and economic issues dividing white and black groups. It was already obvious that the war would be fought mainly by lower class young men, including a large number of drafted black males. This was already exerting a negative influence on all black communities, including those in Omaha.
Therefore the racial conflicts subject matter of the film was timely, though certainly not unexplored in the daily press, scholarly writing and in other media. The whole nation certainly was aware that segregation had long been a major divisive national issue. So the film was not opening a new discussion or exposing new threads. It was different mainly in style, mood and approach.
Using the unscripted approach adopted by the film sponsor, director and production crew, the film focuses upon members of the Augustana congregation and their consideration of proposals put forth by Bill Youngdahl, the new, youthful dedicated pastor of Augustana. He is determined to try to do something about the segregation in Omaha, leading by example beginning with his own congregation. Youngdahl is joined by another principal character, Ray Christiansen, a leader of the congregation, in debating the prospects for introducing forms of integration into church activities. Christiansen, who initially in the film is skeptical, moves more to accept Youngdahl’s views, but remains concerned that the idealistic young pastor is going to encourage a divided congregation, and perhaps a serious loss of members.
The early segments of this film proceed at a rather slow pace. There are civilized discussions between the pastor and various members of his congregation. However, the director learns of a local black man who is recommended as an interview subject, being one of the primary voices of the community. The pastor is set up to have an impromptu conversation in the barbershop where the man works, and so enters Ernie Chambers. The conversation is one-sided and not at all quiet. Chambers is destined not only to be remembered for his passionate and effective presentation of the evils of segregation in the film interview, but his conviction that whites are “evil”, including their religious institutions. Chambers will in later years study law and be elected to Nebraska legislative office, where he has fought off various attempts to unseat him.
In his barbershop appearance, Chambers holds forth about the continued oppression of his community by the white residents, including the members of the local churches. He expresses strong doubts about any change that might be peacefully initiated. Pastor Bill Youngdahl is clearly very stressed during this conversation with Chambers. He returns disheartened to small circle meetings with leaders of his church, and the occasional sermon to the congregation at large, holding forth his ideas related to integration. From various quarters the young pastor begins to receive more negative feedback regarding any forceful push to bring about integration. He is told by many that the church, though members may be sympathetic to the issues, is not the place to begin such an experiment.
Were there any real differences in the government’s approach to integration in Omaha, and in Little Rock? There seems to have been little difference as far as general acceptance of integration, but ironically in Little Rock local school officials decided to attempt in a limited way to the laws and initiate integration. The results, including use of National Guard and other Army units to protect the nine black children admitted to a white high school, were dramatic and highly publicized by the media.
The main difference appears to be the direct and early challenges in Little Rock by the State to federal laws governing equality in education, including the 1954 Brown Act and the 1957 Civil Rights Act. Omaha had certainly not had its own violent protests at that time (these came in the early 1960s). But these were for the most part driven by a major loss of local industrial jobs, unemployment and general poverty -- not directly associated with segregation. Most Omaha violence historically was (and still is) due to typical police/community friction. Still, Omaha schools were then (and remain) heavily minority attendance in certain districts, directly correlated with race. In terms of the attitudes in Omaha (as of the film) these seem mild and not as violent as in other urban areas. The “Southern Manifesto” was certainly opposition to integration on a national scale, though it was suppressed as time went on.
Did the filmmaker meet his objectives? Certainly the Lutheran Church of America received their commissioned work. The film received critical acclaim for technique, and for subject matter particularly from those supporting integration.
Perhaps the most hopeful view of this era and these problems comes from the supplemental course material related to the 1957 Little Rock protests:
During lunch, one of the black male students sat alone in the cafeteria with a glass of milk and a sandwich. Some white students nearby asked him, "Won't you join us?" The boy broke into an enthusiastic smile. "Gee, thanks," he replied. ''I'd love to." They finished their meals together, eating and chatting. The "Battle of Little Rock" was over nearly as soon as it started, without a single serious injury and without a shot fired. [2]
Unfortunately, subsequent racial strife in the U. S. would not abate, though advances in economic and social rights for non-whites have occurred. A good deal of the deeply ingrained views against racial integration still exist.
[1] cinéma vérité. Dictionary.com. Dictionary.com Unabridged. Random House, Inc. http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/cinema verite (accessed: August 24, 2015).
A technique of documentary filmmaking in which the camera records actual persons and events without directorial control: introduced in France in the 1950s.
[2] William Doyle, “Crisis in Little Rock”, Part II - Modern American Society, 1920 – Present, Frederick M. Binder and David M . Reimers, The Way We Lived, (Wadsworth, 2012): 224.