The Only Film You Need for the Fourth of July

Today I started what I intend to become an annual tradition at my house: watching the musical "1776" on the Fourth of July.

"1776" and I go back to 1976, when the nation celebrated its bicentennial. Based on the Broadway show from 1969, the film was made in 1972 and then re-released in theaters in '76. My sister's class went on a field trip to see it, and I heard her enthusiastic account of it. I did not see it myself until years later, when it came out on DVD. By then I had kids, and we all loved it -- the kids even more than me. To this day, we can sing the songs and recite the dialogue with relish.

You'd think that after years of repeated viewings, a movie would get old. And sometimes it does -- if I never see "The Quiet Man" or "Miracle on 34th Street" again, I will die a happy woman. But there is something about "1776" that is enduring. It is not a quaint, charming tale, and the musical is much more than entertainment. It is history, re-enacted with both fancy and deep insight.

The thing that I like the most about "1776" is that it is not just the history of the victors -- the victors in this case being the Continental Congress that, after protracted and often heated debate, finally united in support of the Declaration of Independence. It is also the history of those who lost. And I'm not talking about the British. I'm referring to those American colonists who did not want to separate from their mother country -- like John Dickinson of Pennsylvania, who as a member of the Continental Congress tried to negotiate with King George III and eventually refused on principle to sign the Declaration of Independence. Despite his opposition to a revolt against Great Britain, Dickinson fought in the War and helped draft the Articles of Confederation and, later, the Constitution.

Stories like Dickinson's are the other side of the patriotic coin. Today a man like Dickinson would be accused of treason for not toeing the party line -- extremists who see themselves as the "real" patriots would be building a gallows or calling for him to be executed by firing squad. In fact, colonists who were loyal to Great Britain were literally tarred and feathered -- and worse -- by the "patriotic" extremists of their time. (For more on this, I highly recommend the book Liberty's Exiles: American Loyalists in the Revolutionary World, by Maya Jasanoff.)

"1776," however, does not demonize a man like Dickinson. It urges us to listen to his own words, however much at odds they may be with those of the other Founding Fathers, and to see him as a man of conscience, of principle -- and of a great love for his country as it currently existed.

In addition to the conflict between those who sought revolution and those who sought resolution, the Continental Congress had to come to terms with warring factions on the issue of slavery. Here, too, "1776" wants us to come face to face with the mindset of one -- Edward Rutledge of South Carolina -- who sees slavery differently from his northern cohorts. The difference between Dickinson and Rutledge is that the latter is motivated not by conscience but by money. John Adams calls Rutledge out on this:

"Economy. Always economy. There's more to this than a filthy purse-string, Rutledge! It is an offense against man and God!"

In return, in the song "Molasses to Rum to Slaves," Rutledge drags the North's ugly complicity in the slave trade before the eyes of all present, until they can stand it no longer and the delegate from New Hampshire implores,

"For the love of God, Mr. Rutledge -- please!"

The members of the Continental Congress could not look certain truths in the face, and the film seems to be asking -- can we?

"1776" is, of course, first-rate entertainment -- brilliant dialogue, witty musical numbers, and memorable performances. But it wisely does not stop there. In refusing to allow us to indulge in a monolithic view of history that demonizes principled dissent and whitewashes the narrative in the service of myth, "1776" cautions us that patriotism is more than flag-waving, more than closing one's eyes (or holding one's nose) and lining up on the prescribed side of the aisle. A nation cannot be formed -- and cannot be maintained -- without leaders who possess both moral intelligence and the ability to think through difficult questions with honesty and wisdom.

The release of "1776" was timely, coming as it did during the era of Watergate. As America approaches its 250th anniversary, this would be an ideal time for it to be re-released and its timeless message shared with us all.