If you live in America, you can understand how powerful Hollywood is in making films about historical events (see the post "Hollywood History" for more). You can also understand how influential other mediums, like TV, books, and the Internet are adored by almost all Americans, and how easy it is to edit and re-edit anything and everything containing information. But how does this affect our understanding of human history? Not very well, as it turns out. How many students answer that Isaac Newton was struck by an apple when he discovered gravity? How many are convinced of George Washington's honesty in admitting the truth of the cherry tree? How many swear that John Kennedy and Marilyn Monroe did a little bit of the horizontal tango (this one may not be as inaccurate)? My point is, our education of history has been, for the past 2 centuries, almost completely wrong-due in part to American nationalism and developing a national culture (we gotta make the US look good!). As a teacher, it is your duty to separate the right from the wrong; as a student, it's your duty to understand why one explanation is wrong and the other is correct (at the moment). Let's look at a little scenario to help demonstrate how historical inaccuracies can be systematically eliminated from human thought, leading to better appreciation of the subject (man, I'm really getting analytical, aren't I?).
A student named Joey (Johnny's cousin) is in history class. The teacher is discussing the life of George Washington. The teacher asks anyone if they know any interesting facts about Washington that wasn't said in class. Seizing this opportunity to shine, Joey blurts: "George Washington had wooden teeth."
Unbeknownst to young Joey, this is not a fact, but a factoid: a piece of information that seems like a fact, but is not true, or has some level of truth that is overshadowed by fiction. If the teacher knows any better, they'll recognize this almost cliche "bio" of Washington. But instead of making the student look bad, the teacher should just explain that what they say is correct without saying Joey is completely wrong (because he really isn't; I'm getting to a point here).
The teacher responds, "That's almost correct. Washington did have fake teeth, but they were made out of animal and human bone, not wood. He would've gotten tongue splinters."
Do you see how this is different from just saying "No" and moving on without explanation? Now Joey (and the rest of the class, for that matter) have an understanding of a person they didn't have less than an hour before. The rumor of the wooden teeth was actually a propaganda done by the British to undermine the leadership of the Founding Fathers; it seems to have worked, seeing that many adults I've talked with seem to believe it over 240 years later. If you aren't at least a little detailed in your correction, you'll continue to breed misinformation.
From the student's point of view, a teacher correcting what they always thought was right, in front of a class of their peers, may be hard to take in-it's a sort of Napoleon complex type thing. This could result in a student either silently continuing to believe what was proven wrong or vocally doing so, usually with negative results. By being stubborn, you could either lose a point on a test or your classmates' respect. Simply put, man up and accept that the person who got a degree in this area of study may know more than you. This close minded thinking is exactly what resulted in Columbus attacking and enslaving the Natives of America-he thought they were hiding gold from him, even though they truthfully explained they didn't have any. Be more open to change in opinion and thought, and history class will become a lot more fun and easier for you.
Unfortunately, not all inaccuracies will ever be forgotten. There are any more serious examples than the wooden teeth; entire textbooks had to be altered in the 1970s after it was discovered that they all supported the notion of Washington and the cherry tree as being fact. But with a good teacher and student working together to solve and understand how history is supposed to be taught, these inaccuracies can be further diminished until they are completely eliminated. I mean, who really thinks Lincoln wore a stovepipe hat and that the US tried to kill Fidel Castro with exploding cigars?
-Pharaoh Noh-Tyep
P.S. Out of all the historical events mentioned in this post, most of them are factoids. Can you find out which one (or ones) are real?
No comments:
Post a Comment