Perspective....

This week we have examined interpretation in textbooks and made a first foray into 'reading' or interpreting primary sources. Texts do not clearly state their goal or perspective but as we discovered in class the perspective or interpretation can be found in the selection of material and its arrangement in the text. What was striking to you about this exercise? What did you learn? Should textbooks come with a warning about 'hidden perspective'? Do we need to teach students how to 'read' these texts? To me this exercise is like reading or listening to the news - I don't typically question the truthfulness of the news but am aware that perspective and interpretation is often evident - in the choice and presentation of stories, the selection of material and in the emphasis

            It seems that most of us have come to the conclusion that perspective is an aspect of history that should be taught in high school. In fact some of us go even further to say that “at the middle school level, where textbooks are usually used, teachers should begin to expose students to the idea of perspective.” (Yana’s post) Indeed textbooks do have a certain angle in which facts are displayed, albeit intentional or not. Some of us were slightly aware of this particular aspect to a certain degree, while others (such as myself) were oblivious to the idea that textbooks (once thought to be fountains of historical facts) do portray perspectives. Once I thought about, it certainly does make sense that textbooks would have such a thing. Every author, after all, does have their own perspective and, whether they intend to or not, they do end up placing that perspective in their writings. However, to convince myself even further I went through the plethora of history textbooks I have collected over the years spent here at RIC. On the subject of discovering the “New World,” one text book (Eric Foner’s Give Me Liberty! Vol. 1) the author talks about Columbus going out to intentionally find this New World. However, another one of my textbooks (World’s Together World’s Apart) talked about the need for new trade routes that went beyond the Afro-Eurasian continent and were much faster than the established ones. Columbus set out to accomplish this but accidentally came upon two huge continental landmasses that would later become known as the “New World,” (i.e. North and South America). Two different authors…two very different perspectives.

            I agree with what Sye had to say about warning labels on textbooks and how perspective is not a dangerous aspect but rather a natural part of us that practically makes us human. Indeed, students should be made aware and should even be taught about what perspective is and how that applies in the field of history. Primary sources should be brought in the class in order for the students to get a full meaning and a much clearer picture of what perspective is. This makes history classes in both middle and high schools more hands on and much more interesting.

Response to articles

The article that appealed to me the most was Zinn's...mainly because most of his points I could agree with. I think I am drawn to Zinn's interpretations because he talks about not just what history is, but also of how it should be handled. Before reading this interview...I had always aspired to be objective when viewing history. However, admittedly, I have always failed in this aspect especially when talking about slavery overseas, in the U.S., the Caribbeans, etc. So, when I read Zinn's interview, (and through further discussion in class), I came to the conclusion that historians, and history scholars, teachers, etc. all have a bias, but it's not their bias that should create the interpretation rather it is the evidence should paint the picture for others to interpret (not sure if i made any sense there sounded better in my head). Zinn also raises another point which I had always agreed with when he gave the example of the Mexican War and how we should not just view history from the sides of the victor, or even the important figures throughout history. Perhaps we should view how the Mexicans viewd the war, or the soldiers, or the politicians against the war...there are so many view points in which history can be viewed because everyone of us is part of history.
Becker's article is interesting...he talks of how history is an everyday activity by reducing the definition down to its lowest terms; history is the memory of things said and done. A few have stated that Becker's article is difficult to understand and its hard to see his point. I myself had to his writings more than twice in most areas. However, he does raise certain points that are noteworthy and true. When he talks about history as being as near to us as just a second ago, he raises a good point about the present. He states that “Nevertheless, we must have a present; and so we create one by robbing the past, by holding on to the most recent events and pretending that they all belong to our immediate perceptions.” He calls this the 'specious present.'   

History 200 Expectations and Why I Like History

In History 200 I hope to improve upon my analytical skills when writing a paper. I have a problem when it comes to developing my own thoughts. Not that I have issues with plagarism rather I tend to use quotes from others because I feel that my message is not clear or even strong enough for the reader to understand. From what I've heard about this class and from reading the course syllabus it seems that this aspect will be covered and I am looking foward to improve in these areas and possibly more. I could also use some help in coming to a conclusion in papers.
As to why I like history...I guess I enjoy looking at the ties of past events that can be seen even in today's politics. For instance take the new formation of the Tea Party...well not so long ago (mid-late 19th century) the formation of the Populist Party was founded on nearly the same reasons as the Tea Party. This type of knowledge (ability to realize the repeating of past events in today's society) I believe offers a different view of the world and its interactions.