So many limitations and trammels of historical fact: Mythmaking in the portrayal of the President in twentieth century American drama.

摘要

The purpose of this study was to investigate the portrayal of the President of the United States in selected twentieth century American dramas in order to identify the ways in which the representation of this historical figure reflects both the man portrayed and an expansion of a perceived "Presidential" persona as well as the socio-historical setting in which it is created. This objective was prompted by two concerns: the need to understand the use of drama as a tool to affect the transformation of public perception of an historical figure, and to consider the implications of mythologizing the past in order to comment upon contemporary matters. In order to connect these two factors, the author has investigated four varied twentieth century American dramatic works and their performances: I'd Rather Be Right, Kaufman and Hart's 1937 musical revue portraying Franklin D. Rooseve Howard Koch and John Huston's dramatization of Woodrow Wilson's Quixotic battle to establish the League of Nations, In Time to Come, a drama that opened two weeks after the bombing of Pearl Harbor; Give 'em Hell Harry, Sam Gallu's 1975 one man show picturing the "man of the people" Harry Truman; and Nixon in China, a grand opera by John Adams and Alice Goodman which debuted in the waning years of the Reagan revolution.; One conclusion reached at the end of the study was that in each case, a President in whom the public held low regard underwent a transformation of popular conception at or near the time of the initial performance of a theatrical work in which said President was portrayed as a mythic figure. While in no case was the theatrical work the initiator of the reevaluation of the President, all contributed in varying degrees to the reconsideration. In three of four cases, those of Roosevelt, Truman, and Nixon, dramatic material was drawn from efforts of the Presidents or former Presidents to alter public perception of themselves. Another conclusion reached was that, in all cases, the mythologization of the President was brought about not through the elevation of the man to god-like status, but the humanization of the Presidential Icon to a position of man among men. Finally, the author examined the use of the dramatic works as valid research tools of the historian, concluding that as historical documents, the theatrical works are of greater value as a reflection of the social milieu in which they are written than accurate portrayals of the life of the President.