tv Cold War Educational Film CSPAN September 1, 2017 3:43pm-4:32pm EDT
incoherent. it was a rebellion. >> three-day labor day weekend on american history tv on c-span 3. next on lectures in history, virginia commonwealth university professor karen rader teach as class on mid 20th century educational films used to teach students about nuclear warfare and science. during the cold war, policy makers feared u.s. population was falling behind the soviet union in science education. the class includes a look at animated programs created by noted hollywood director frank capra in the 1950s, this about 45 minutes. all right so good afternoon and welcome. today we're going to talk about cold war era science education films. and in particular ones that were made for tv and the classroom. now, we've been talking about classroom films before.
to do any kind of history of classroom film, you need to understand the scholarship in a lot of fields, i'm going to be quoting and referencing and pulling together work that i've done, work that's been done by other historians of science. film studies people. communications studies scholars, even folk lorists. for reasons that should now be obvious, the topic is interdisciplinary. in particular we're going to return to this question, right. what are the relations between art, science and entertainment and culture, in cinema? how do they reinforce one another in these particular contexts? we're going to see the movement of people, the same people across institutions, right, across media forums. and across science. so it's all going to be kind of blending together. and also science education. obviously in science education
what students are taught depends on what the state-of-the-art knowledge is for that period. we have to consider what is the scientific and technical knowledge. to understand this historically we have to understand how science education is both a product and a driver of culture. what i mean is that any form of science education is going to incorporate attitudes and approaches towards both education and science. that are kind of predominant at the time. >> so before we move way back to the 1950s. i want to kind of unpack sitcom assumptions you might have when i say "science" on tv. some of you are probably old enough to remember either seeing the first time or watching in rerun, bill nye, the science guy. bill nye is this generations predominant tv science educator, he wears the white coat or blue. and he does interactive science
experiments very enthusiastic. he himself is a scientist, right. or you remember someone like sheldon from the "big bang." the science sitcom is another model. or maybe i didn't put it up here because i thought it would make me sound really old, things like "e.r." the medical doctors, "numbers" the mathematician working with his brother. these are contemporary genres or images we have of what science on tv is. to really understand what's going on in the 1950s, you have to back up. because tv was new media. particularly for education. so tv was to education then what something like the internet or mooks or online education is to education now. it's this brave new frontier. it's not so new, it's really comes out of the use of 16-millimeter film in classroom.
which is something we've talked a little bit about for the '20s and '30s. moving that discussion forward, what's going on in the '50s is a massive expansion of the use of 16-millimeter film in classrooms. that's driven in part by technology. you see a picture there of the kodak pageant projector. the pageant projector was a new projector that kodak invented, lighter, more portable, easier to thread, the film didn't burn, always good when a school system invests in it although the film did sometimes burn. it was advertised as not burning. this new version of classroom technology really sort of fostered the expansion of the educational film industry. so film historian jeff alexander in his book "films you saw in school" estimates that there were approximately 100,000 or so give or take. films that were made in this period. they were made largely by
educational film companies. so these would be companies like coronet, archer, we're going to see archer today, when we watch "duck and cover." even encyclopedia britain did the ica. so any time that a new technology is introduced into a classroom. maybe this didn't happen when teachers had their pointers. any time a new technology is introduced in the post-war period, there's a little bit of hand-wringing goes on. you see the appearance in the 1950s of a series of books, this one, television and education in the u.s. who is credentialed in the school of education and the department of communication, he asks the question to which the obvious answer is yes.
can it be that education in our time is suffering the a sea change. his next question what is excellence in kind of classroom film and video instruction? and just as importantly how is it absorbed? kind of focusing not just on the production of the knowledge, but on the consumption, the learning as we would call it. so some hand-wringing is to be expected. but there's also a lot of enthusiasm. the fcc commissioner in 1951 published a piece in "variety" a trade magazine for hollywood and the performing arts, in which she articulated her vision for television and education. television, she said is one of the greatest forces known for education. she says are we going to let this genie serve as a unvarying
diet of horror stories or can we harness the genie to perform wonders of public enlightenment unequalled since the days of the ref nance. >> renaissance, another enlightenment in television which is something that today is pretty mundane, pretty much a part of our everyday life. so it's a very successful use of film particularly for propaganda and newsreels, and first they're used before movies and people liked them so much that they developed dedicated newsreel theaters and you could go to a theater just to watch one after another newsreel in big cities like new york and l.a. and in 1948 newsreels became a television program. nbc launched a ten-minute, not a
long one, a ten-minute called camel newsreel theater. something like the first cnn except it's not running 24 hours. it's running every ten minutes, every once in a while. so newsreels were very popular. propaganda films like "why we fight" it was made during world war ii by frank capra who had some army experience, but joined back up after the bombings of pearl harbor and was immediately grabbed by his commanding officers because by that point he was an oscar-winning hollywood director, right? so he had some incentive to be used in this way rather than at the front, and so his commanding officer recruited him to do what he called and i'm quoting, now. documented factual information films that will explain to our boys in the army, the principles for which we are fighting.
so kind of invoking the documentary ethos, but clearly meant to persuade with douchltry and propaganda for "diet of the wills" which is considered to be the best, if not the best, in quotes, propaganda films of all time. so they've had a lot of success with the use of film for conveying information for persuading, for convincing. of course, they would think that it would have more applications in the classroom, but this became even more urgent in the context of the dropping of atomic bombs on hiroshima and nagasaki in japan and the real escalation of what several people have called the nuclear culture or the nuclear future, right?
so this nuclear future, on the one hand, right? everyone knew about this, everyone knew that this ended the war and it was a massive loss of life, right? it was a very grim, dark scene and it was the dark side of atomic culture. the thought is in the post-war period harnessing nuclear energy for positive uses, so and 1958 became known as the adams for peace speech and it became a propaganda for peaceful uses of atomic energy would include reactors for generating energy, but also things like radioisotopes, that then become medical tracers. so then you have in the logo that eventually gets made, the
medical icon, too, right? medicine, science, engineering, agriculture. it's all going to be a part of our nuclear feature. just in case the speech and those methods of persuasion didn't work, they also developed a series of traveling museum exhibits. that is atomic energy commission-sponsored exhibit and atoms for peace and it would be likely if you were an elementary or middle school student and you went to a museum in the '50s that you would see one of these and they would have things like radioactive frogs and frogs that have been injected with radio i i isotopes and it would start clicking. some of the first interactive exhibits and adams for peace exhibit and that's a good example of museums reinforcing other mediums, right? museums trying to become new just as film is trying to become
new on television. and we find out from looking behind the scenes documents because it wouldn't be marketed this way in public and it was emotional management of the tensions involved in the nuclear culture and the tension being on the one hand, escalating nuclear armament that's the hallmark of the cold war period, but on the other hand, the home front uses of atomic that they want to domesticate. so educating civilians and in particular, educating children became a high priority. so bo jacobs talks about how this generation was the first generation that learned to live in a nuclear world, and you can see the folks from the indian springs school in nevada which is next to an air force base,
right? it's a two-room school, and and duck and hold one, and they learned how to spell atom and bomb before they learned how to spell mother. just imagine that shift and learning those words that had much bigger and more than the word mother. in particular, a lot of children in the procedures of civil defense in what are the actual threats of an atomic attack. what would it look like? and so they devised this film called duck and cover. what we'll do here is watch a small clip of the introduction to "duck and cover" featuring the theme song.
♪ ♪ ♪ a major threat and he never got hurt ♪ ♪ he knew just what to do ♪ he's duck and cover ♪ duck and cover ♪ he did what we all must learn to do ♪ ♪ you and you and you and you ♪ duck and cover >> be sure and remember what bert the turtle did because every one of us must remember to do the same thing. that's what this film is all about "duck and cover," this is an official civil defense film produced in cooperation with the federal civil defense administration and in consultation with the safety commission of the national education association produced by -- >> it's going to go again. all right. because if it goes again you'll want to sing it.
all right. so what do you notice about that introduction? a couple of things. so i played through the song, so that it could talk a little bit about the ways in which the production values of both the content and the production values were framed by interactions between lots of different kinds of artists and those who were interested in conveying the actual information. so for those who were interested in conveying the information, the federal civil defense authority and school safety organization, from the national educational association, right? so government people collaborating with school teachers, collaborating with fairly high quality talent that was recruited by the producers at archer films. so the film was written by ray meyer and directed by anthony rizzo and the jingle was writtenian wards. it didn't initially start with the jingle. the jingle was written afterward
by the same team that advised see the usa in a chevrolet? that slogan, when it resonated for the generation and if you watched madmen, i think it was the advertising culture that produced these slogans that became a part of massive advertising campaigns and even in the case of the chevrolet slogan became a hit for a pop singer named dinah shore, right? so there's crossover here. so it's a very upbeat and positive song. it's very memorable and we have female voices and male voices. the goal of this film, bo jackie be on jacobs talks about how to teach children how to survive an atomic attack by themselves. that's important, right? because part of what's going on here there are two parts to what's going on here. on the one hand you have to inform children if they see an
atomic a jack. bo jacobs says making the threat normative, something as scary as an atomic attack you cannot show film of to children, right? because it's too horrifying. so instead, using the medium of animation they portray the bright light. the light is described as a bright flash, brighter than the sun, right? and it transitions into the animation where clearly the atomic bomb is and the narrator is saying this in a calm tone, smashing through buildings and causing a burn worse than your worst sunburn, right? so these are all ways to kind of take this knowledge and convey it, but in a way that maybe children would understand and would be a part of their world. now, the other side is not just conveying what it is that you're actually seeing, knowing that you're doing this and that you're being a part of this, but
what to do. so the narrative there also takes a kind of domestication tone, right? it talks about responding to a bomb is not unlike responding to a fire, right? or an automobile accident, right? these are all things that can happen in your daily life, just add atomic bomb to the list, right? and come up with a plan for responding and both use of animation as the technology and the narrative of the film is one of the hallmarks the other thing that jacobs talks about is the way in which this film acknowledges and now we're kind of transitioning to attitudes towards education, right? so the idea that you would have to respond as a child by yourself to an atomic bomb rather than through a teacher or some authority figure, right? is a real shift. it's a shift in traditional social roles that is really part and parcel of the new atomic
world, right? so what the film does is they assure children that grown ups will be around, so i'm quoting from the film now, older people will help us. by the way, it's an adult narrator pretending to be a child. older people will help us like they always do, but there might not be grown ups around when the atomic bomb explodes and then you're on your own, right? so they can help you get across the street and they can help you find a shelter, but in that moment, what are you going to do to respond? and so really try to heighten the alert of your children and be aware of when this is happening, so places like you can see the girl carrying against the school building wall, right? it can happen in the school yard and it can happen when you're riding your bike in the neighborhood and it's timmy or tommy, i can never remember his name and he immediately drops his bike, right? and covers. so jacobs talks about how in
order to achieve these new social roles what the film has to do is make some traditionally idyllic childhood spaces kind of scary, right? if you're in the school yard or riding your bike, an atomic bomb could fall. so he says this is are the so of the dark side of cold war science education and this is a movie that tells a tale, i'm quoting now, of a dangerous presence and a dismal future because then it begs the question, if you're around and the atomic bomb drops and you've done your duck and cover, when you come up, maybe you're still alone and maybe this is the future in this decimated, nuclear world. so duck and cover is a film that educates about the actual phenomenon and also tries to persuade children that can have a response if they have a social role on the home front that can respond to this and that ge goes
beyond that they have some control. pretty heady stuff for elementary schools. the lighter side of science education coming at it from the other angle still addressed at children all of the way from college students and really focused on enhancing funding and investments by the government in science research and science education. this is not new to the 1950s and this is something that comes out of world war ii and the presidential science adviser described here on the cover of "time" magazine, the fact that the presidential science adviser is making the cover of "time" magazine should tell you something, should tell you this is the vision of the future that government will support research activities by public and private organizations and in particular, science education, right? so the first thing to come out of this vanvar bush, the general
of science and the general of physics heads the national science board that is rolled over into what is now the national science foundation becomes the first very big government foundation and there were institutes of health before that and this is pure research and education thunder. as the 50s move on, sputnik which you may or may not be familiar with, sputnik, what the soviets fired into space that were circling the u.s., spying on us, really escalated our attentions between the russians and us and in particular around the issue of what they would call today the pipeline problem. the pipeline problem is the idea that you need to have people at every level of science education, staying in science education so that we can build what they call scientific
manpower and same language is the language of war. except with these scientific manpower and women power people are going to do is work for research to counter the soviet threat. >> so -- in addition to sputnik and kind of all of the existing efforts for the government to fund science and push an agenda of research and education, was there a massive economic boom after the war and a large, corporate windfall, particularly with company says like at&t, right? and bell who were science and technology companies, right? and the thought among those companies was that some of this might be plowed back into promoting science education as they presented it in public and you can hear if you listen to hemo the magnificent to promote man's, forts to understand
nature's laws. well, yeah. that's all well and good, but the other push for this was coming from advertising agencies which of course, have ties not just to communication media, but to hollywood, right? so crossovers there. so in particular marcel lesfolier have done research and showed that the agency n.w. heir were pushing bell to attract more family audiences and sort of hook them early on the brand, right? and then you have a bigger market as time went on. so this led to at&t and bell labs investing in a series of science films which are among the most popular and widely held in classroom collections even to this day, they're still held although they're not shown as much. although you can see from the shape of the icon and they're in video now, vhs and dvd.
so these would be about various phenomena and the strange case of cosmic rays and these are ones that capra was involved in and i'll talk about it in a minute and unchained goddess, and i'll talk about the weather and ultimately it was eight one-hour programs and over roughly a seven or eight-year period through which, and drawing the analogy here between duck and cover and this and a similar top-level artists took place to produce these films. so it's kind of -- it's less in congress to focus on frank capra as doing his duty for the government to make a propaganda film than it is to someone who won three oscars, right? deciding that he's going to do science films. so what gives with frank capra and his directing and production of many of these films? >> first off, capra, it was thought, had the perfect
background for this. he actually had some science training lear in his undergraduate degree from cal tech and chemical engineering in 1918 and during world war i, he taught math to artillery recruits at fort scott in san francisco. so he wasn't ever going to be a filmmaker. at the age of five his family emigrated to l.a. and worked through college doing odd jobs and in san francisco he saw an advertisement for the opening of the film studio and he went and basically hustled himself in the door and let them think he had more experience than he actually did with cameras and various other things because he was interested in it and that was the thing that got the ball rolling. now he left, although he had a great deal of success in hollywood in the '30s. as i said, he left hollywood and he came back at a moment when his career was in a bit of a
lull. >> many of us remember him primarily for "it's a wonderful life," a christmas classic and a much beloved film and at the time it got mixed, critical reviews and he was in a lull. that's part of the explanation for why he wants to do these films and the other piece of it has to do with the fact that he was a deeply committed catholic. and so you will see when we look at these films and i'll talk about that after we watch the clips. another thing to say about capra is later in his life, he reflected on what was it that made him a success and he subscribed very strongly to what film study scholars would have the theory and the director has the vision and the director is one that without any interference with producers and they recruit the writers and work in close contact with them, and it's kind of a team, right?
the team will work together closely and he says this is the way that motion pictures can become more important and have something to say to the picture going public. so he did that when he was recruited to work for the bell laboratory series in several ways. the first is he picked well-known actors. the character's name in the script was the fiction writer, played initially by a well-known character actor and played by richard karlsson who would have been recognizable to viewers of "the creature from the black lagoon" kind of sci-fi, and karlsson, to reinforce this idea of the team that capra had, karlsson directed some of the later films when capra backed out. so there really was this kind of
sense of collaboration. similarly, if you thought you heard, daffy duck, and mel blanc who later voiced barney rubble on the flintstones and the animators interestingly, the production company run by seamus, and we had people traveling from film culture into tv as an influential new medium as a place where they can sort of work with other really interesting artists, so culhain had an animated television program, and he had participated in animating disney's "snow white." it's a long, artistic legacy being taken from film to science education for television.
so, okay. i want to transition now to talk a little bit about the plot structure and the characters and this should be the most familiar to you because we talked about frankenstein and the scientist which the plot would represent. the fiction writer right in this guy, and the fiction writer creates cartoon figures and there are animals alongside a greek god figure they call their king, right? this is hemo the magnificent is the king of nature and king of the animals, but really the personification of blood, right? and hemo and his cast of animals get into a conversation with the fiction writer and the gentlemen on your right, dr. research. there was not a lot of creativity with names in this
production. so doctor research, it turns out is actually a university of southern california english professor named frank baxter. frank baxter was, if you went to school in the '70s and the '60s and '70s, you are guaranteed to have seen one of his films and he had a famous series about shakespeare that he did and he became the personification of the scientist even though he is a scientist. he's not a doctor, and he is a scientist and mr. fiction writer interact with the animals through a magic screen which is an interesting way to describe a screen in which animation is projected, right? mr. fiction writer is the wise guy, joe q public, right? he's always voicing the concerns that the audience might have. he smoked cigarettes and he's twitchy. he's very calm and he has a lot of the markers of a stereo
typical, nerdy scientist thinking back to fred mcmurray and the nutty professor. the glasses, the calm, rational temperament, the bland, gray flannel suit, right? much of the first part of the film is the discussion between the animated characters and the human characters about blood mechanic, right? and so it's a discussion that take place partially in film and partially through animation, but half way through there is a pivotal moment where hemo gets confrontational. and he says, stop. we've both been talking about plumbing and both humans are taken aback, right? hemo says we're not going to go any further unless you can tell me the two words that unite the study of blood mechanics and the study of art, poetry and nature. so mr. fiction writer gets a panicked look in his face and says doc, let's not do it. it's a trap.
that only becomes a cliche later and he tries to get him to not do it, but dr. research is very calm. so let's watch the clip where this goes down. >> that's a good question, but before i can go into that i'll have to tell you something about blood itself. >> just a moment, brother scientists. so far your chatter has been elementary, but harmless, but now that you've come to me, i refuse to listen further unless you first describe me in just two words. >> i can. >> never mind, professor. mention the two key words, and i'll know you understand the poetry and the mystery and the true meaning of blood, otherwise back to your plumbing. >> hey, doc. he's trapping us. do you know what the two words are? you do?
[ laughter ] >> the the two words that best describe you and connects you with the mystical origins and traditions of life are seawater. >> seawater? >> quiet! brother research, my apologies. you mean he's right? listen to this learned man and you'll hear a real tale. >> seawater? >> doctor, please tell them who i am. >> well, thank you. it's only a theory, of course. >> this, i've got to see. if you squeeze the human bodies, you squeeze out some 30% of the body weight of about six gallons of free water which we shall call body fluid. this squeezed out body fluid has a salt content of 5%. tropical sea animals might exist in this aquarium of body
liquids. the salt and seawater are like the salt in body fluid, as you can see. although seawater today is two or three times skaltier than bo body fluids today, represent the salty composition of seawater as it was nearly 400 million years ago when life emerged from the sea and began to crawl on land. a billion and a half or 2 billion years ago, life had originated in the tropical waters as a minute cell of organism and something akin to the single cell we know today as the amoeba. this shakeless, jelly-like cell, have food and oxygen directly from the sea and passed out its carbon dioxide and other wastes to the warm ocean. in the beginning, hemo was the
sea. >> all right. so what we have there is on the one hand, dr. research articulating what he said is just the theory about the oceanic origins of blood and linking the oceanic origins of blood with hemo as the sea is frank capra weighing into the territory of evolution. evolutionary biology and for capra there really is no divide between a scientific vision of evolution and a religious appreciation for science and its view of evolution and later on you can see joe q. public and he gets impatient with that, right? he starts to challenge dr. research, are you saying i'm like those germs? i am different. >> you are different. you have the human spirit and capable of doing science and science is what links all of these things. so, kind of not what you expected, right? something on evolution in a film
about blood. >> similarly at the end of the film capra invokes christian imagery in what's supposed to be an inspiring final statement on the possibilities of science and art. so let's watch that one, too. >> challenge the spirit of man and there are hundreds of others and the men of science will solve them brother hemo, one day. >> sure you will. what better way to love thy neighbor than to heal him. >> we're limited. man's not limited. your creation's favored. you can imagine, reason, dream, create. you know right from wrong.
to use these divine gifts and all nature's waiting to hear how you handle it. you're right, brother. research into nature's mysteries could well become the most rewarding and far-reaching of all. one of your greatest physicists, max plant, say over the temple of science should be written the words, he must have faith. they prove all things hold fast that which is good, and a saint says prove, together they spell hope. take a lesson from your heart. >> all right. just in case you weren't getting it before the hymn-like music
started, right? what's capra doing here? he's really articulating what he sees as fluid connections between science, art and religion, right? so human exceptionalism and that's part of sort of the western christian tradition and exceptionalism and part of that is being given the divine gift to reason and that juxtaposition to max plunk and he must have faith and that is to say the religious thing against st. paul saying prove all things and the scientific thing is meant to be a use of imagery that blurs those boundaries and he doesn't see it as a negative thing and he sees it as a thing that can drive things forward in an inspirational way. >> there are other imagery throughout this film in which capra was involved when we get to the discussion, we can talk
more about how that shifted without his involvement, but -- so, i do want to hear about what your reactions are when we talk about the films and let's stay in the 1950s and what was the critical response to hemo the magnificent. the reviews were not great and this is the review from "time" magazine, hemo is a costly monument to the low opinion that some speak to the intelligence it spoke to grade schoolchildren and interested them in silly ways, but then also the circulatory system discussion is really boring. why is it boring? the time reviewer thinks it's because he used more animation than film and this is the case that the reviewer says by jazzing up, right, the story of
the circulatory system he threw scientific footage film that was as good as its kind ever televised and the effect was that you never want to get the next sentence in review, and unhappily the filet minion smothered with gobs of mushroom sauce, right? want a fan. interestingly, the animation works in "duck and cover" in a different way, right? and there are probably ways that there could have been film used and there would have had to have been film of animals, right? and probably that would have been a whole other set of issues to have to deal with in terms of doing it in good taste and censorship and animal rights activism. capra's choice to use animation rather than film backfired in terms of the critical reviews. >> that said, this was a wildly popular series even when it came out. in 1956 the very first one attracted 25 million viewers and that's not a lot by today's
standards because now we have so many fragmented segments of the tv market, but what was even more remarkable was over the next ten years it found new life in classroom viewing. this was a film that was exactly like the vision of the fcc commissioner and that it would go back from tv into the classroom. capra got letters and james gilbert and the historian of american religion has a chapter in his book about these films and he gets a letter from the viewer telling capra it was, quote, not only fine entertainment in scientific education, but it was a religious experience and to combine the three was a stroke of genius, indeed. so what's interesting about that is that i think people make assumptions after the scopes trial in america, because that was such a widely publicized media circus and it was such a clash between fundamentalists and scientific perspectives that
what we get from watching this movie is a sense of diversity of popular ideas of evolution and the relationship with religion. so how did this film get made? it got made largely because of capra, but it was received the way that it was for several reasons so katherine pandora that you read, talks about the way that you have to go back to television as a medium and development and the standards for different genres and science documentaries and science education, right? inspiration, were still being formed and the fact that these things are not subtle allows them to work with those, right? james gilbert has a different idea coming from the perspective of the history of religion and in very prominent cases like the
scopes trial that was to sell the controversy by the media, but in fact, gilbert puts it and capra did not have to build bridges between science and religion because they were already there and all he had to do was walk his films across them. >> last, but not least we have the perspective of gregory at indiana university in the folklore department. this film was able to be made because capra was a premiere story teller and he was exercising his artistic license to create a kind of new mythology and a religious sense of cosmic unity, mystery and awe. so there are multiple theories for kind of not only why it got made, but why it was received the way it was received and why it continueded to have success over the years in classrooms. to conclude, by coming back to this larger lesson that katherine pandora articulates so
eloquently, some of what we do in this class is very much science for the masses, right? science for a popular audience. pandora really warns us not to ignore science for popular culture, because when you ignore the science of popular culture you miss levels of thinking and she never says the public because it is not a single entity, right? it's publics or popular culture and using it in a way like hemo to understand that this was present really not that long ago. >> we have to go back to before reformation and we're talking about 1950s u.s. and why we need to study science and popular culture interact. so with that, i'm going to leave you with suggestions for further reading. if you want to follow up on science and television and marcel has written an amazing
book as has audra wolf on science and katherine pandora on the stud of popular science and the history of science. so thank you for being here and i will see you next week. >> american history tv is in prime time all week with our original series, lectures in history, focusing on college and university classrooms around the country. tonight, we take a look at the civil war including a lecture on cultural heritage and confederate monuments. american history tv in prime time begins at 8:00 p.m. eastern. labor day weekend on american history tv at 8:00 p.m., fears of overpopulation. >> some of the issues talked about earth day, pesticides was a big one. pollution was a big one. non-renewable resources things
like oil and gasoline, but the super big one and the thing that overshot that first earth day was the prospect of global famine due to overpopulation of the earth. >> sunday on the presidency. the friendship between presidents hoover and truman. >> it is easy to overlook the fact that they both had roots in farming communities. they had known economic hardship and self-reliance. they were transformed by the con fla gracian of world war i. >> on monday the 1967 detroit riots. >> we prefer to think about it like a rebellion because all of the energy and anger and activism that went into that moment had long been predicted and people had been begging for some remedy for the housing discrimination, the police brutality and the economic
discrimination and so that frustration cannot be understood as just chaotic and incoherent. it was a rebellion. >> three-day labor day weekend on american history tv on c-span3. >> next on lectures in history. university of north carolina chapel hill professor teaches a class about the korean war, general douglas macarthur's removal by harry truman and civil and military relations. his class is about an hour. >> today i'm going to talk about the korean war and we'll talk about civil-military relations and last time we met we talked about the cold war and the development of containment. korea was an unusual situation in that it had been a colony of japan since