The Birth of a Nation:

Commemoration Written in Controversy

Haley Smith
Civil War Spring 2016

There is no better way to relive history, than through a good film. Through fantastical
storytelling, special effects, skillful actors, and accurate costumes, movies have cemented
themselves as the favorite American pastime for decades. Many Academy Award Nominations,
have been given to films with some sort of historical reference or background. Despite their
popularity, however, not all historical films are based on historical truth or fact. There is no better
example of this than the first ever blockbuster film, D.W. Griffiths The Birth of a Nation.
Released in 1915 the silent epic-drama depicting the Civil War and Reconstruction is seen as the
most celebrated controversial film in history. The Birth of a Nation set the stage for what would
become the quintessential Hollywood Blockbuster, while simultaneously discriminating AfricanAmericans, and subsequently, cementing the NAACP as a prominent civil rights organization.
The National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, or NAACP, was
founded in 1909 by Moorfield Storey, Mary White Ovington, and W.E.B. Du Bois. Their mission
statement was simple, but extremely powerful for the time, to ensure the political, educational,
social, and economic equality of rights of all persons and to eliminate racial hatred and racial
discrimination.1 The association was formed because of lynching and racial hate acts becoming
more recognized around the United States.
The NAACPs early movements were very much rooted in anti-prejudice and
desegregation movements. The NAACP promoted these ideals through a number of mediums
such as written works and speeches. In 1910, only a year after its founding, The NAACP
founded The Crisis magazine which, to this day, is the main publication of the NAACP. The
Crisis would work as the main voice of the NAACP, and help keep the public notified of its
many accomplishments and causes. In the year of 1915, the NAACP had little recognition, and
no significant movements, other than its creation. With the release of Birth of a Nation the
1 "NAACP: 100 Years of History," last modified 2009, http://www.naacp.org/pages/naacp-history.

NAACP unified behind a cause, and saw major growth by utilizing and perfecting its publicity to
grow membership and recognition.2
David Wark Griffith was one of the first prominent film makers in the world. He had
done several short silent picture plays prior to 1915, but none would leave a legacy like Birth
of a Nation. Based on the novel The Clansman written by Thomas Dixon, a Baptist preacher
from North Carolina who despised the novel Uncle Toms Cabin. At the time of production,
America was in the midst of the 50th anniversary of The Civil War, and World War One had just
begun in 1914. It was a, seemingly, ideal time for a film of this nature.3
In The Birth of a Nation Griffith utilized revolutionary camera techniques, brilliant
casting, and never before seen special effects. The film was one of the first to exceed an hour run
time, with it running approximately three hours. The history depicted in the film had never been
seen before, and it was the first film to dramatize former President Lincolns assassination. When
shown at Liberty theatre, opening day, the film was accompanied by an orchestra that had
specially composed music for the film, which was unheard of for the time.4
The film also utilizes an obscene amount of racial prejudice. The Birth of a Nation shows
southern African-Americans as illiterate, criminal barbarians terrorizing well-to-do southern
families. It depicts former slaves trying to engage in interracial marriage/romance, which the
film is clearly against and presents like a scene from a horror movie, complete with a white girl
committing suicide after being chased and cornered by a former slave. The African-American
and Mulatto individuals in the film are depicted as crazed sex fiends who engage in sexual
activity with anyone they come across. Thomas Doherty, a University Film Professor states
2 "NAACP: 100 Years of History."
3 Eric Niderost, "The Birth of a Nation': When Hollywood Glorified the KKK," HistoryNet, last modified
October 2005, http://www.historynet.com/the-birth-of-a-nation-when-hollywood-glorified-the-kkk.htm.
4 Lou Lumenick, "Why Birth of a Nation Is Still the Most Racist Movie Ever," The New York Post (New
York, NY), February 7, 2015

about the film, I always have to explain to my students the scene at the end where the Northern
soldiers are holding rifles over the heads of the women while theyre besieged by negroes trying
to break into their cabin. The soldiers are prepared to bash the womens brains out to save them
from succumbing to lustful black males.5
Most noted by critics, however, is the glorification of the Ku Klux Klan in the film. Birth
of a Nation presents the Ku Klux Klan as white knights riding to take back the south from black
corruption and terror. The Klan saves several white damsels in distress throughout the film, and
are depicted as noble southern heroes.
The NAACP moved quickly to try and ban the premiere of The Birth of a Nation. They
held several protests, published numerous pamphlets, and openly spoke out against the film.6
Reformer Jane Addams stated the film was Grotesque, Viscous, Unjust and untrue, but
admits that some of the elements of the plot are based on actual events and she goes on to cite
the depiction of Lincolns assassination as an example.7 Another reformer, Mary Childs not only
condemned the film, but called for its censorship. Specifically the scene in which the young
white girl commits suicide to escape the African-American male, or when the mulatto politician
kidnaps the main damsel and tries to force her to marry him. Interestingly enough, these two
scenes seem light compared to the other racist scenes in the film.8
The efforts to ban the film in the early years were fruitless for the NAACP. This is
attributed to a number of reasons, but most noted is that President Woodrow Wilson loved the
film; Probably because Griffith used excerpts from President Wilsons novel A History of
5 Lumenick, "Why Birth of a Nation&rsquo
6 "NAACP Sixth Annual Report, 1915," The Crisis, March 1916, 254.
7 "Reformer Jane Addams Critiques The Birth of a Nation," History Matters,
http://historymatters.gmu.edu/d/4994/.
8 Mary Childs, "An NAACP Official Calls for Censorship of The Birth of a Nation," History Matters,
http://historymatters.gmu.edu/d/4966/.

America in the film. With the President of the United States backing the movie, and the
incredible popularity surrounding it, the NAACPs hopes of banning the film were soon
destroyed.9
However, the NAACP was not finished. The association stopped trying to ban the film,
and instead tried to censor it. In this they proved only mildly successful. I was unable to find
specific scenes that were cut from the original film, but in certain areas, it was made apparent by
the NAACP in The Crisis that they had succeeded in censoring the film.10
In the 1920s, D.W. Griffith decided to re screen Birth of a Nation in New York City.
Only 5-6 years after its initial release, the film had quickly set the new standard for the film
industry. There are many claims to why D.W. Griffith would reshow his epic-drama, but
probably the most obvious, besides a cash grab, was that the film was seen as the biggest
accomplishment in film in 1915. Its reshowing could be compared to the repeat showing of
James Camerons Titanic every year in theatres across the nation. In a 1922 article, The New
York Times claimed that Griffiths film was no longer the best film ever made, and that many had
surpassed it in the years after its release.11 It would seem as good a time as any for Griffith to
reestablish his directorial superiority.
However, probably the most damning explanation for the rescreening of Birth of a Nation
in New York City, was Ku Klux Klan recruiting new members in New York at the same time.
Having been condemned many times by critics for glorifying the Ku Klux Klan, and being held
responsible for the second revival of the Ku Klux Klan, the film ran into more problems upon its

9 Niderost, "The Birth of a Nation,'" HistoryNet.

10 "NAACP Sixth Annual Report," 257
11 "'The Birth of a Nation' Still Stirs," The New York Times (New York, NY), December 5, 1922, The
Screen

second release. The KKK controversy that surrounded the film worked as a mobile for NAACP
activist to ban, and censor the film more so than they could after its initial release in 1915.12
After being informed of the re screen of the film, the New York NAACP chapter
immediately called, again, for the film to be banned in New York state. The call for ban was
taken to court by the NAACP on the grounds that the film was a threat to peace, We demand the
revocation of the permit on two grounds. First, that it is a glorification of the Ku Klux Klan
coming at a time when the Rev. Haywood had announced that a drive is on for an increased
membership in the Klan, and we believe that it has been brought here for this purpose. In the
second place, it is the revival of race prejudice sentiment which has followed the picture
wherever shown and had caused riots in many instances.13
D.W. Griffith and Thomas Dixon, both at the court hearing, defended the rescreening and
the KKK occupation as just a coincidence, It is purely for commercial reasons. Griffith said,
And the fact that it comes at the time of the proposed drive by Dr. Haywood is simply a
coincidence. I intend to revive all of my former picture in the immediate future.14 I was unable
to find the results of this hearing. However, the calls for censorship won by the NAACP
effectively made a dent in the films epic story. D.W. Griffith mentioned that the censorship had
butchered the original story, and the NAACP mocked the borderline unintelligible recut. Griffith
also condemned the fact that is some states, like Chicago, young people under 21 could not see
the film.15 This call for age restriction by the NAACP came after a young boy, after seeing the
film, promptly stated, Id like to kill every nigger I know.16
12 "Foes of Klan Fight 'Birth of a Nation,'" The New York Times (New York, NY), December 3, 1922, The
Screen
13 "Foes of Klan Fight," The Screen
14 "Foes of Klan Fight," The Screen
15 "Photo Plays and Branches," The Crisis, September 1915, 245.
16 "Governors of Two States against Photo Play Libel," The Crisis, January 1916, 140.

Not all the action was taking place in New York, however. In France, ex AfricanAmerican servicemen from WWI actively protested the film, and stated that the film
misrepresented them. This protest resulted in the arrest of several of the protesters, but also the
ban of the film in France.17 However, the ban was not specifically because of the blatant racism
of the film, but specifically because of the glorification of the KKK.18
There are several probable reasons for the change in reaction by the NAACP toward The
Birth of a Nation between 1915 and 1920. The most apparent can be seen in the growth and
influence of the NAACP whose membership had grown to over 91,000 from only 6,000 in
1915.19 The NAACP in 1916 cites the film as unifying the African-American community against
a single cause, and also bring the support of white liberals and minorities to their cause.20
Another probable reason for the latter success against the film, and what seems to be most
prominent in the documents and articles I reviewed, would be the second revival of the Ku Klux
Klan in 1915, the same year as the films premiere. Although Griffith claims in was not his
intention, the second revival of the KKK used the Birth of a Nation as a recruiting tool, even
though the depictions of the KKK in the film are untruthful and woefully out of touch with
reality.21 Just looking at the depiction of the KKK in the film compared to the 1920s klansmen
get up, it is easy to see where the second KKK received their inspiration (See figures 1.1 and
1.2).
The second rival of the Ku Klux Klan, founded by William J. Simmons, differed in a variety of
ways from the original. The creation of the KKK was an anti-black movement in the south from
1866-1869 that lynched and tortured African-Americans in unimaginable ways. The second
17 "Negroes Oppose Film," The New York Times (New York, NY), May 7, 1921
18 "'Birth of Nation' Film Banned by Poincare," The New York Times (New York, NY), August 20, 1923
19 "Annual Report National Association for the Advancement of Colored People," The Crisis, March 1920
20 "NAACP Sixth Annual Report
21 Niderost, "The Birth of a Nation,'" HistoryNet.

revival, however, was not only anti-black, it was also anti-Catholic, anti-immigrant, and antiSemitic. In the height of European immigration to the United States, the Klan broadened its
hatred, and became larger than ever with over 3 million members at its height.22 With more
groups being targeted by the Klan, protests for the Birth of a Nation grew rapidly. Now not only
from the NAACP, but from other liberal groups as well.23
D.W. Griffiths commemoration of the Civil War and Reconstruction Era is probably one of the
longest debated in history. Even today, over 100 years later, there seems to be clear divisiveness
regarding the film. Some prominent filmmakers praise Griffiths film accomplishments, and
some poke fun at his commemoration of the KKK, such as director Quentin Tarantino is his film
Django Unchained. While some film professors, like Doherty above, utilize the film in their
curriculum, others refuse.24
However, the film also brought about magnificent strides for the NAACP. It seems weird to
attribute a large portion of early growth and success of an organization to the very thing it was
protesting. But even the NAACP itself stated the movie helped unify the African-American
community behind one cause.25 As well, the NAACP utilized the protests toward the film to
better their publicity and spread their influence.26 Today, the NAACP is the worlds most
prominent civil rights organization. It has waged and won countless battles against
discrimination in the United States and across the world. Their early movements, including the
ones against the film The Birth of a Nation, helped unify their organization, spread their
influence, and cement their cause.27
22 "White Sheets in Washington, D.C.," History Matters, http://historymatters.gmu.edu/d/6689/.
23 "Annual Report National Association for the Advancement of Colored People," The Crisis, March 1920,
253.
24 Lumenick, "Why Birth of a Nation&rsquo,"
25 "NAACP Sixth Annual Report," 254.
26 "NAACP: 100 Years of History."
27 "NAACP: 100 Years of History."

The story of The Birth of a Nation appears to be a bittersweet story. A revolutionary film
that helped propel an unknown director into Hollywood infamy, surrounded by criticism of
prejudice and ignorance. The revolutionary techniques clouded by the backwards portrayal of
Klansmen and African-Americans. A woefully offensive and racist spectacle that helped unify
and build an unknown, adolescent organization. D.W. Griffith would never create another film
with such a profound impact and controversy.28 His legacy would forever be held in The Birth of
a Nation while the NAACP would grow into the biggest organization for Civil Rights in history.

Figure 1.1

28 Niderost, "The Birth of a Nation,'" HistoryNet.

"White Sheets in Washington, D.C." History Matters.

http://historymatters.gmu.edu/d/6689/.

Figure 1.2
Scene from Birth of a Nation depicting KKK.

Bibliography

"Annual Report National Association for the Advancement of Colored People."

The Crisis, March 1920, 240-66.
Childs, Mary. "An NAACP Official Calls for Censorship of The Birth of a Nation."
History Matters. http://historymatters.gmu.edu/d/4966/.
"Governors of Two States against Photo Play Libel." The Crisis, January 1916,
139-41.
Lumenick, Lou. "Why Birth of a Nation Is Still the Most Racist Movie
Ever." The New York Post (New York, NY), February 7, 2015.
"NAACP: 100 Years of History." Last modified 2009. http://www.naacp.org/pages/
naacp-history.
"NAACP Sixth Annual Report, 1915." The Crisis, March 1916, 245-64.
The New York Times (New York, NY). "'The Birth of a Nation' Still Stirs."
December 5, 1922, The Screen.
The New York Times (New York, NY). "'Birth of Nation' Film Banned by Poincare."
August 20, 1923.

The New York Times (New York, NY). "Foes of Klan Fight 'Birth of a Nation.'"
December 3, 1922, The Screen.
The New York Times (New York, NY). "Negroes Oppose Film." May 7, 1921.
Niderost, Eric. "The Birth of a Nation': When Hollywood Glorified the
KKK." HistoryNet. Last modified October 2005. http://www.historynet.com/
the-birth-of-a-nation-when-hollywood-glorified-the-kkk.htm.
"Photo Plays and Branches." The Crisis, September 1915, 245.
"Reformer Jane Addams Critiques The Birth of a Nation." History Matters.
http://historymatters.gmu.edu/d/4994/.
"White Sheets in Washington, D.C." History Matters.
http://historymatters.gmu.edu/d/6689/.