tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7872819010848426693.post1644738230495077020..comments2024-03-28T02:46:03.227-04:00Comments on The Historical Society: History and MythRandallhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16755286304057000048noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7872819010848426693.post-63454076712312059872011-06-30T14:01:54.987-04:002011-06-30T14:01:54.987-04:00Dan, I admire your commitment to both intelligence...Dan, I admire your commitment to both intelligence, nuanced teaching and transparency. Excellent naming choice for your blog. Certainly, we cannot lapse into either trap (unchecked myth-making or deconstructionism for its own sake) in teaching. I find the same also applies to writing/reading, particularly when one is bombarded by both "great man" hagiography and, again, the tearing down of people and events by writers whose agenda trumps objectivity.PWnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7872819010848426693.post-5750377469323717272011-06-29T13:11:13.026-04:002011-06-29T13:11:13.026-04:00I completely agree, PW, that myth-busting motivate...I completely agree, PW, that myth-busting motivated by a nihilistic commitment to a history of "broken promises, systematic cruelty, and failed dreams" (quoting Chris quoting James Livingston, yesterday) is probably both bad history and unlikely to advance the social goals of history education. I tried to call attention to that irony when I called my new blog "History Truth Squad ( http://www.historytruthsquad.com/)." <br /><br />In any case, I think there IS a need for and a place for myth, at least when we use history to address and contextualize the present. There are many archetypes we could choose from -- I guess I'm arguing for more creativity in the myths we choose to build on, and maybe for more open introspection and disclosure of the process.dan allossohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10733670017382794923noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7872819010848426693.post-51570811923675655282011-06-29T11:01:10.469-04:002011-06-29T11:01:10.469-04:00A well-written post, Dan. I think an equal danger ...A well-written post, Dan. I think an equal danger is to apply post-colonial/deconstructionist theory to history without limit, so that students are taught to almost be ashamed of their country, and true victories (such as the defeat of the Spanish Armada, for British students)or figures (George Washington, as one example) are diminished. Myth-making and exceptionalism are certainly problematic, but so is deriding genuine triumphs. At least this is the case in the typical British classroom. Evidently you're not advocating this, but do you agree that the pendulum can swing too far the other way?PWnoreply@blogger.com