The answer is quintessential Armstrong: He’s the guy who prefers to turn poetry into prose. The one time he seems least himself is when he utters the line that’s supposed to immortalize him: “That’s one small step for man, one giant leap for mankind.” Dropping the “a” before “man” winds up being his sole extraterrestrial mistake.

It’s not that Armstrong is incapable of eloquence. It’s that his manner of eloquence is direct, gracious and above all modest when everyone else — Walter Cronkite and Richard Nixon in particular — strains for grandiloquence. To borrow a line from Barack Obama, he knows too well that he didn’t build that. His sense of his place in history is that he’s mainly an accident of it.

And there lies the greatest marvel of the Apollo program: Not so much the size of the endeavor, or the machines that were built to accomplish it, but rather the quality of self-effacement among the men most associated with its success. Armstrong, easily one of the most celebrated men of the last half-century, refused to become a celebrity. He kept his politics to himself. He made no oracular pronouncements. He did not amass fabulous wealth.

He stayed humble, and human, in the era of relentless puffery and self-promotion. This, too, feels as bygone as the Saturn V, the Right Stuff, and the “one small step”— and as missed.

How do we reclaim it?

That’s a moonshot-scale question, but here’s a worthy contribution. As I was writing this column, I got a call from Ken Burns, a friend and renowned documentary maker, who told me about a new prize endowed by Boston philanthropists Jonathan and Jeannie Lavine in collaboration with the Library of Congress and The Better Angels Society. The award, which is currently accepting applications through June 1, will annually grant $200,000 to a young documentary filmmaker in the final stages of producing a feature film.

“We are in a situation right now where we are dialectically preoccupied: red state or blue state, gay or straight, rich or poor, male or female,” Ken told me by way of explaining the prize’s significance. He’s looking for an antidote. “Films that will reach a broad audience and speak to the enduring themes of what we are and what we share in common.” Winning entries, he added, will focus on American history, be nonpartisan, “Homeric in scope but intimate in details.”

“Apollo 11” is such a film. Go see it. Now, more please.

The Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor. We’d like to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips. And here’s our email: letters@nytimes.com.

Follow The New York Times Opinion section on Facebook, Twitter (@NYTopinion) and Instagram.