Losing credibility? With who? Surely not the 7- to 12-year olds, yet that is 
the target audience. If teaching is currently at a 20% inaccuracy rate, then 
striving for a 10% inaccuracy rate is commendable. It is even more worthy if 
it opens doorways in young minds. Clara, perhaps you are in the minority 
when you say that ALL of Eckert's work is tainted. I don't know. I tend to 
look for the "positive" in things, others look for the "negative."

Tom
Eastern Shore & More Forum
http://www.easternshoremore.com/forum/
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Clara Callahan" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Monday, February 12, 2007 5:09 AM
Subject: Re: Native American Culture


> 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 

To subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe, please see the instructions
at http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-hist.html