{"content":{"sharePage":{"page":0,"digests":[{"id":"46567656","dateCreated":"1321582321","smartDate":"Nov 17, 2011","userCreated":{"username":"RobbieCa","url":"https:\/\/www.wikispaces.com\/user\/view\/RobbieCa","imageUrl":"https:\/\/ssl.wikicdn.com\/i\/user_none_lg.jpg"},"monitored":false,"locked":false,"links":{"self":"https:\/\/integratingculture-at-nyu.wikispaces.com\/share\/view\/46567656"},"dateDigested":1532760420,"startDate":null,"sharedType":"discussion","title":"Chapter 6","description":"Question for Chapter 6
\n
\nAfter our previous posts about the \u201cheroification\u201d in textbooks, chapter six John Brown and Abraham Lincoln provides an interesting contrast. Loewen writes that Brown\u2019s \u201cviolent acts make him ineligible for sympathetic consideration.\u201d (182) Why do you think textbooks heroify certain figures such as Columbus leaving out many harsh truths about their lives, and label others such as John Brown as insane? What argument is Loewen making about antiracism? What does this say about our culture?","replyPages":[{"page":0,"digests":[{"id":"46662620","body":"Caitlin,
\n
\nYour question is extremely thought provoking and complex causing us to doubt much of what we know about our history and question why it is that we know only pieces of our past.
\n
\nWho decided which pieces of history should be shared with the public? From reading Loewen, it seems that textbook writers had a lot of power in deciding which parts of history should be exposed in order to show America in a positive light.
\n
\nLoewen tells us that we need to realize that the insanity in which John Brown was charged with was never "psychological" but "ideological." The actions of John Brown "made no sense to textbook writers between 1890 and about 1970", thus to make no sense was to be considered "crazy" (177).
\n
\nPersonally, I think that labeling John Brown as "crazy" was an attempt of textbook writers to downplay the indecency of slavery during that time. Abolitionists, such as John Brown, provide evidence that the cruel, harsh and unfair conditions that existed in the realm of slavery were apparent and very well known. Because of historical figures such as these, we are now not able to say that "slave owners did not know any better" nor are we able to attribute their actions to the idea that, "that was just how things were back then." So rather than admitting that many of the prominent figures that make up our history were cruel, indecent and unfair, it is easier to simply say that they did not know "any other way" and that those who did claim to know "another way" were actually "crazy."
\n
\nSo, if we are still unable to fully admit to the racism that existed in our past, what does that then say about present racism in our society?","dateCreated":"1321742004","smartDate":"Nov 19, 2011","userCreated":{"username":"jmp557","url":"https:\/\/www.wikispaces.com\/user\/view\/jmp557","imageUrl":"https:\/\/ssl.wikicdn.com\/i\/user_none_lg.jpg"}},{"id":"46681344","body":"I really liked the final question you posed Jackie, "if we are still unable to fully admit to the racism that existed in our past, what does that then say about present racism in our society." This immediately struck me because the first thing that came to mind was our discussions in class at the beginning of the semester about why is race a taboo subject. Why do many of us get uncomfortable talking about race and racism? I wonder if part of the reason is that it is evident that textbook authors are uncomfortable writing about racism so many of us have not been exposed to reading, let alone talking, about racism. Very interesting question Jackie!","dateCreated":"1321803996","smartDate":"Nov 20, 2011","userCreated":{"username":"RobbieCa","url":"https:\/\/www.wikispaces.com\/user\/view\/RobbieCa","imageUrl":"https:\/\/ssl.wikicdn.com\/i\/user_none_lg.jpg"}},{"id":"46695654","body":"Caitlin and Jackie, you both bring such interesting points to our discussion.
\n
\nJackie, I completely agree with your response. I too have thought about the reasoning behind textbook writers underplaying and\/or ignoring the harsh reality of many situations in our nations history.
\n
\nI also believe that this distorted reality about racism in textbooks has a direct relationship to what we were exposed to in schools, and therefore it is one of the reasons why racism it is often a "touchy subject" or as Caitlin said a "taboo subject" in conversations.
\n
\nI feel that time plays a significant role in both of these points...
\n
\nOn page, 179 Loewen states, "Not until the civil rights movement of the 1960s was white America freed from enough of its racism to accept that a white person did not have to be crazy to die for black equality."
\n
\nBeing that the 1960s was only about 50 years ago, I feel that it is going to take our generation to write the truth in textbooks as well as teach about these truths that were once (and still may be to some) considered "crazy."","dateCreated":"1321825900","smartDate":"Nov 20, 2011","userCreated":{"username":"kac546","url":"https:\/\/www.wikispaces.com\/user\/view\/kac546","imageUrl":"https:\/\/ssl.wikicdn.com\/i\/user_none_lg.jpg"}},{"id":"46736866","body":"I agree and think the questions you guys are briging uo are hard ones. Jackie, your question about racism in the past and today make me think about a point that Loewen makes in chapter 5. He says, "Levels of racism have changed over time. If textbooks were to explain this, they would give students some perspective on what caused racism in the past, what perpetuates it today, and how it might be reduced in the future" (146). I think part of the reason racism has become such a "taboo" or "touchy subject" like Caitlin and Kelly said is because it is not mentioned throughout history. Like, we became so normal talking about slavery. Its normal for us because it is something we all learned about and have accepted that it happened. Racism, however, isnt mentioned and it is something we arent comfortable discussing because discussions around that topic are not as frequent or common.","dateCreated":"1321889444","smartDate":"Nov 21, 2011","userCreated":{"username":"BarbSutton","url":"https:\/\/www.wikispaces.com\/user\/view\/BarbSutton","imageUrl":"https:\/\/ssl.wikicdn.com\/i\/user_none_lg.jpg"}}],"more":0}]},{"id":"46109606","dateCreated":"1321032054","smartDate":"Nov 11, 2011","userCreated":{"username":"BarbSutton","url":"https:\/\/www.wikispaces.com\/user\/view\/BarbSutton","imageUrl":"https:\/\/ssl.wikicdn.com\/i\/user_none_lg.jpg"},"monitored":false,"locked":false,"links":{"self":"https:\/\/integratingculture-at-nyu.wikispaces.com\/share\/view\/46109606"},"dateDigested":1532760420,"startDate":null,"sharedType":"discussion","title":"Heroification","description":"Why do all (or most) textbooks take part in the "heroification" of certain characters in history? I dont understand why ONE person in the history of textbook writing didnt just say "I am going to write what REALLY happened." Why WOULDNT someone write what really happened?","replyPages":[{"page":0,"digests":[{"id":"46134410","body":"In the Heroification chapter of James W. Loewen\u2019s Lies My Teacher Told Me, Loewen provides several explanations for why so many (if not all) textbooks take part in the \u201cheroification\u201d of certain characters in history. The first suggestion offered by Loewen is that these testimonies of \u201cheroes\u201d are written in order to \u201cinstruct by human example\u201d and \u201cshow diverse ways that people can make a difference.\u201d (12) He later writes that by including these examples to follow, textbooks are providing \u201cencouragement\u201d and \u201cinspiration\u201d for students. Textbooks are intentionally showing characters in a positive light as a role model for students. While I think this is admirable in some ways, I do not think this should be the purpose of teaching history. Yes, education should include lessons about how to be a responsible citizen, but this does not need to be addressed in history textbooks and past presidents and other heroic figures do not need to provide the example. This \u201cDisney version of history\u201d results in a lack of \u201crealistic role models\u201d (28) for children and it is not teaching them proper history. Loewen gives many other suggestions for why textbooks present history in this way. By sighting historian, Michael Kammen, Loewman shows us that this is an issue that has been raised on several occasions by a number of scholars; \u201cMichael Kammen suggests that authors selectively omit blemishes to make certain historical figures sympathetic to as many people as possible\u201d (26). However, Loewen also quotes a historian that supports this method; \u201cNorma Gabler testified that textbooks should \u2018present our nations patriots in a way that would honor and respect them.\u201d (26). Finally, Loewen creates a list of possible reasons for this study of history; \u201cpressure from the \u2018ruling class\u2019, pressure from textbook adoption committees, the wish to avoid ambiguities, a desire to shield children from harm or conflict, the perceived need to control children and avoid classroom disharmony, pressure to provide answers.\u201d (28) Although Loewen never gives a definitive thesis of his own belief as to why textbooks teach history in this way, I think anyone reading this chapter will agree that this is not the best way to present history to any age group.","dateCreated":"1321059442","smartDate":"Nov 11, 2011","userCreated":{"username":"RobbieCa","url":"https:\/\/www.wikispaces.com\/user\/view\/RobbieCa","imageUrl":"https:\/\/ssl.wikicdn.com\/i\/user_none_lg.jpg"}},{"id":"46191748","body":""Why WOULDNT someone write what really happened?"
\n
\n...This is a question that I can't seem to fully wrap my head around!
\n
\nCaitlin, I agree with your entry I have thought about these ideas as well. The fabrication of facts does help to "avoid ambiguities" and "shield from harm and conflict\u201d..but like you said this "is not teaching them proper history."
\n
\nAs I continue to read the chapters that we agreed on I have come to realize another reason why someone may not have written what really happened\u2026
\nPerhaps the authors or presenters of the "facts" may have something to do with the lack of truth in textbooks. Who is it that is writing these textbooks? Where do they come from? Could they be the reason that the truth is not entirely presented? Whose point of view or perspective is being shed through the \u201cfacts\u201d? Lowen states, \u201cThe opposite of racism is antiracism, of course, or what we might call racial idealism or equalitarianism, and it is still not clear whether it will prevail. In this struggle, our history textbooks offer little help. JUST AS THEY UNDERPLAY WHITE RACISM, THEY ALSO NEGLECT RACIAL IDEALISM. In doing so they deprive students of racial role models to call upon as they try to bridge the new fault lines that will spread out in the future from the great rift in our past (Lowen, 173).\u201d","dateCreated":"1321209719","smartDate":"Nov 13, 2011","userCreated":{"username":"kac546","url":"https:\/\/www.wikispaces.com\/user\/view\/kac546","imageUrl":"https:\/\/ssl.wikicdn.com\/i\/user_none_lg.jpg"}},{"id":"46205124","body":"From what we have learned throughout the semester, it seems so natural for us to understand that we need to teach our students the full story and not the fabricated tales that we find in most history books. Like Barbara and Kelly stated, I can not seem to understand how teachers before us did not have these same feelings or ACT on them. I am sure there have people in the past that have questioned this same issue and so WHY has no one done anything about it?
\n
\nCaitlin, I think that you address a lot of the points that Lowen makes in attempting to explain why so many characters of history are written as "heroes" in textbooks. I noticed that he mentions the need to provide examples of human role models (as Caitlin also mentioned) and he notes that "who our heroes are and whether they are presented in a way that makes them lifelike, hence usable role models, could have significant bearing on our conduct in the world" (30).
\n
\nBut what about the role model of a teacher? It is the responsibility of a teacher to give students as much information and facts as he\/she can and then let the students form opinions for themselves. In my opinion, it is much more meaningful for students to read the REAL stories about these "heros" and come up with the ways they would stand up for what is fair, rather than simply encouraging them to imitate the fabricated actions of our claimed historical "heros."","dateCreated":"1321225666","smartDate":"Nov 13, 2011","userCreated":{"username":"jmp557","url":"https:\/\/www.wikispaces.com\/user\/view\/jmp557","imageUrl":"https:\/\/ssl.wikicdn.com\/i\/user_none_lg.jpg"}},{"id":"46209002","body":"Caitlin, I loved how you said that students should be learning about how to be model citizens but presidents and heroic figures dont need to be role models. When i first read it i really aggreed with you but then I started thinking, what if all of the flaws and terrible things that presidents and high-profile people did were out in the open? Young kids would be surrounded by things like that in the media, and now they would be learning about it in school? I think its too much for little kids! They may get the wrong idea that in order to be someone like the president, or someone in the public eye you HAVE to be like that. I dont know.
\n
\nKelly, I didnt really look at the racial side of it but youre totally right. I also wonder how many kids these days will tell you that their role model is some historical figure? I wonder if kids look up to historical figures because of their seemingly "heroic" actions? Would they still look up to them in the same way if all their flaws were out there?
\n
\nJaclyn, thinking about this as a teacher, i think youre 100% right about teachers having to teach the facts and then let the students form opinions. I also think that in order to let them form their own opinions, you need to guide them and scaffold that, like, teach them how to do that. If you are teacing older students like 5-6 grade then fine, they can figure it out for themselves. But if youre teaching the younger grades it can be a little scary to teach them about the flaws and wicked ideas\/intentions of the key people in our history. Wouldnt they be confused? Like, why did they get away with being like that? They did such great things but they were racist (lets say), so maybe i can be racist and still do great things and make history textbooks. I dont know. I dont see a reason for ALL textbooks to omit things like that, I think there is a time and a place for the truth and all the facts, but maybe elementary school isnt it?","dateCreated":"1321230003","smartDate":"Nov 13, 2011","userCreated":{"username":"BarbSutton","url":"https:\/\/www.wikispaces.com\/user\/view\/BarbSutton","imageUrl":"https:\/\/ssl.wikicdn.com\/i\/user_none_lg.jpg"}},{"id":"46250208","body":"Loewen provides many explanations for why history is not told as it really happens.
\n
\nOne idea is that by omitting many of the negative details of a person and history in general, more people will be able to sympathize with the story being told.
\n
\nA second explanation was our need for simple, "one-dimensional" stories that are void of controversies. This makes it easier for us to understand texts and provide children with appropriate materials. Loewen refers to this as the "Disney version of history."
\n
\nI think that something that is really important (which refers back to Loewen's intro as well as chapter 1) is that there are very few texts books that are used in our society. There are a handful of texts that are taken ultimately as the final story and continue to be reproduced. And instead of going to review old sources and artifacts that could contribute to and extend our perceptions of the past, these few texts books continue to be used to write new texts and cut out information rather than adding more.
\n
\nIn my presonal opinion, I think that heroification and this idea that "the truth isn't being told" has to do with the pride that we all have in the things that we choose to identify with. No one wants to hear about the bad things that our presidents did because they are the people we choose to lead our country. This became very apparent for me when we took a survey in our section on how many people learned that slavery did not exist in the North. It turned out that everyone who was taught this happened to live in the North. So it is possible that history is taught another way in other places, but we just hear the story that someone wants us to hear.","dateCreated":"1321287698","smartDate":"Nov 14, 2011","userCreated":{"username":"gtutson","url":"https:\/\/www.wikispaces.com\/user\/view\/gtutson","imageUrl":"https:\/\/ssl.wikicdn.com\/i\/user_none_lg.jpg"}}],"more":0}]}],"more":false},"comments":[]},"http":{"code":200,"status":"OK"},"redirectUrl":null,"javascript":null,"notices":{"warning":[],"error":[],"info":[],"success":[]}}