On Jul 1, 2007, at 8:54 PM, Anne Pemberton wrote:

> J South,
>
> I'm not sure what the "test" was that you put in your message, but  
> I suspect you were upset that the students were asked to study  
> about Nat Turner. Is that supposed to be bad?
That would entirely depend upon the context.

> Nat Turner is not listed in the SOLs, but a good teacher and good  
> textbook would include him in the story of the events leading up to  
> the overthrow of the slavery system.
Yes one could, as an exemplar of how not to do it.

> I can see a teacher asking the children to compare Nat Turner to  
> George Washington or Thomas Jefferson who both advocated freedom  
> for the colonies and fought/wrote so that they jeopardized their  
> lives to make it happen.
If you're meaning GW & TJ as the both, then yes, we agree.

> Nat Turner did the same
Where exactly did you do your reading for that one?

> , had many supporters in Virginia and elsewhere, but unlike George  
> Washington he was not successful in defeating "The British" and  
> paid the price that would have been paid by George and Thomas had  
> the war not been won.
A comparison that favorably compares Turner with GW & TJ is so  
obviously deficient in understanding the context that it is beyond  
words. You might get it across, but I doubt it sincerely at a 4th  
grade level, as a comparison of opposing means and methods, opposing  
ideals and practices and similar but never as a direct positive  
comparison of aims to means, ideals to means and methods, etc. But  
wait, that's the hyper-relativist argument isn't it, the non- 
judgmental posture? Perhaps I missed it but where did either GW or TJ  
advocate discriminating slaughter as in targeting one race?

Lyle Browning, RPA