What I think is a shame is the trend of leaving out bits of history so as not to offend anyone (or shock the children). It's too bad, and I thank my parents for never censoring my reading-- allowing me to read about such horrible historic occurrences as murder, cannibalism, treachery, and mayhem (committed by the "good-guy" Europeans as well as other ethnic groups). There's so much that's more fascinating than Betsy Ross's flag and George's silver dollar. Children are not stupid unless we make them so. Too many educational entities are making history into purveyors of the boring, politically correct, or (at worst) political agenda.
My annoyed 2 cents.
-Melinda
--
Melinda C. P. Skinner
Richmond, VA
-------------- Original message ----------------------
From: Sunshine49 <[log in to unmask]>
> well we can be 100% accurate and all the scholars will be pleased,
> but the kids will flee in droves. Considering the appalling ignorance
> of history among kids these days [kids, heck, college students who
> don't know what century the Civil War was fought in], every little
> bit helps, IMHO. Every nation's history is flecked with myths, half-
> truths, and outright errors, but it doesn't change the overall
> importance. Of course, avoid the outright howlers, but if someone has
> their character doing something a year before the prevailing evidence
> says it was done, I think historians should be tolerant and try not
> to lose sight of the big picture.
>
> Just my 2 cents.
>
> Nancy
>
> -------
> I was never lost, but I was bewildered once for three days.
>
> --Daniel Boone
>
>
>
> On Feb 12, 2007, at 5:09 AM, Clara Callahan wrote:
>
> > If you're trying to get children to read and learn, why on earth
> > would you run the risk of losing credibility by teaching them
> > something that is 10% inaccurate? Why not 20% or even 50%? I
> > would think that the goal should be to get it right, not just get
> > it published. Perfect example is Eckert's description of how Blue
> > Jacket killed his white brother in battle. That inaccuracy has
> > tainted ALL of his work.
> >
> > Sunshine49 <[log in to unmask]> wrote: My view [and I've had two
> > novels of historical fiction published, one
> > of which attracted the attention of the BBC] is that getting people,
> > and esp. children, to read and learn something about history in this
> > day and age is important, even if it might be only 90% accurate.
> > Better they learn that 90%, than nothing at all. And who knows, it
> > might open the door for a few young minds to investigate history
> > more. I like the concepts for your books, that's a great idea, and
> > would engage kids' imaginations, which is wonderful.
> >
> > Nancy
> >
> > -------
> > I was never lost, but I was bewildered once for three days.
> >
> > --Daniel Boone
> >
> >
> >
> > On Feb 11, 2007, at 10:14 PM, Douglas Deal wrote:
> >
> >> Anne:
> >>
> >> I see your point... I had misunderstood the basic "format" of the
> >> book. But there is still the question of verisimilitude. What is it
> >> that you want readers of your book to discover or understand about
> >> early Jamestown and the native inhabitants of the area? What sort
> >> of historical accuracy is necessary? What sort is unimportant?
> >>
> >> Doug
> >>
> >> To subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe, please see the
> >> instructions
> >> at http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-hist.html
> >
> > To subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe, please see the
> > instructions
> > at http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-hist.html
> >
> >
> > To subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe, please see the
> > instructions
> > at http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-hist.html
>
> To subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe, please see the instructions
> at http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-hist.html
To subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe, please see the instructions
at http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-hist.html
|
