It's Black History Month, and filmmaker Shukree Hassan Tilghman is on a mission to end it.

To do it, he braves the reproaches of his parents; both former and current soldiers in the revolution for civil rights and other social causes; the Association for the Study of African American Life and History, whose vice president tells him to "stop playing post-modernist identity games;" and an angry mob led by a grade school-aged boy who rips up his sign (okay, that beat-down is one of amusing dramatizations that drop throughout the film.)

Tilghman's provocative documentary, More Than a Month, is an engaging look at the history of Black History Month and a meditation on what that month means to different people across 21^st-century "post-racial" America, including Tilghman himself. More Than a Month screens this Wednesday, Feb. 22, at 7:30 pm at Rice University's Rice Media Center film auditorium.

Chris Becker: More Than a Month is currently touring and screening around the country? How is the film being received?

Shukree Hassan Tilghman: So far so good, probably better than I could have ever imagined...I don't know if it's because of the ads, or maybe the poster or whatever it is…people tend to come in almost ready to argue, or fight, or at the very least they come in with some skepticism about the notion of ending Black History Month.

And by the time they leave, even if they don’t agree with some of the things in the film, they seem to feel like they went on a journey. That they got to experience balanced points of view. People seem to really enjoy it by the end. And that makes me feel good.

CB: One great thing you do in this film is offer voices from across generations on this topic. I'm thinking of Darrell Scott, the Vice President for the Association for the Study of African American Life and History, and his point that ending Black History Month means an end to mainstreamed education of black history. Do you still believe this is a valid point?

SHT: I think this is still a valid consideration. I'd like to think the notion of ending Black History Month is not counter to the mission of having exposure to black history increased and mainstreamed, but that it's a continuation of that mission.

So the idea would be that creating — I don't want to sound esoteric — but sort of creating a situation, or a world, or a society, or whatever where there wasn't a need, and I think that's the key word, where there wasn't a need for Black History Month. I think the creation of that world is a worthy endeavor for all of us to take part in.

If it is true that if you took away Black History Month there would be nothing, then I don't know if that's an argument to keep it! One could look at that as an argument that [...]

CB: It's not working!

SHT: Yeah! Exactly! More reason that you should think about doing away with it, so that real change could come.

CB: Going to your experience with the Sons of Confederate Veterans (who appear and are interviewed in More Than a Month). I'm assuming the members of that group are not interested in including the history of slavery in their own narrative. But why do think there is that disconnect, when they're standing face to face with you, an African-American man, who's clueing them into the fact that their efforts to present a balanced history are actually hopelessly skewed?

SHT: That's a really good question. Of course I can only speak from my observation. I would love to hear what they would say to that, you know? But since they're not on the phone, I can only sort of guess.

I don't know if I would call it racism, although that may be sort of in the mix. I think it's more a question of, for them, the story of slavery and the Confederacy is a "dumbed down" version of the story. Their mission is to let people know that the Confederacy was not just about slavery. That the Confederate flag is not about racism, that it's about soldiers, I mean, that's sort of their agenda.

I think they would be better served — if their mission really is true and honest or at least aspires to truth and honesty and balance — if they could find a way to acknowledge the complexities of the Civil War, including the fact that it wasn't just about slavery. Most historians would acknowledge that and agree with that. But it's not the opposite either. It's not not about slavery.

That's what I tried to comment on, that ultimately, it was about power.

CB: There was a feeling of being dis-empowered because they felt they were being misrepresented in the mainstream, is that correct?

SHT: That's totally accurate. That's the core of their whole mission, that they don't feel they are adequately or accurately represented.

It's interesting, because as a person who likes history, and understands that history is complex, it's not simple. In a certain sense I understand where they're coming from. I understand this idea of wanting to honor your ancestors and have this story be more nuanced. But you can't have it both ways.

CB: At this point, do you think we need to hang on to Black History Month? Or maybe do we just need more dissonant voices like yours who are asking, "What about the other 11 months of the year?"

SHT: I think that it's probably not an either or situation. I think you can be "for" this history to be woven into the tapestry of American history, toward the creation of that narrative, and be "for" a Black History Month.

However, I do think that we, not just black people, we as Americans, — because it is our story and we have to have some ownership of it — that we have to be vigilant to make sure that the existence of Black History Month doesn't preclude that effort. That it's not used as a crutch. And that's where, as you say, the dissonant voices come in. You have to have people who are questioning.

One reaction I got at the last screening, this woman said one of her takeaways was that history, or the American story, is not a static thing. It's something that lives. Always retold, revised, rehashed, and that's good!

One of the things we do as a society is continue to breathe life into that story and make sure that it reflects who we are. That's really at the heart of what the film is about — all of us taking ownership of this living story and not being afraid to keep it changing and evolving.