Bill Howard's Jan. 6 article, "History lives, if we let it" is quite a good article. But I disagree with Mr. Howard when he appears to equate a Steven Spielberg movie with the enunciation of history.
I refer Mr. Howard to Spielberg's film "Amistad," wherein the movie depicts President Martin Van Buren as summarily replacing a federal judge. That is not history. Thankfully, our Constitution establishes a wall between the president and the judiciary.
I am not claiming to be an authority on Lincoln. But Mr. Spielberg severely discredited himself as a historian in my eyes with his depiction of the Amistad affair, and so I question the historical value of his movie about Lincoln.
And, yes, I view the Lincoln movie as some of his acquaintances do: as "pure entertainment," not to be taken seriously, as the depicted events may indeed not accord with the historical reality.
THOMAS A. WELSH
Delmar