ASSIGNMENT
Howard Zinn in A People’s History of the United States explains from what perspective (or bias, if you will) he chooses to write history. He also explains why he is doing that, and why that is one legitimate way in which to write history. Briefly recount his explanations, and offer an example of how he is doing that from a chapter of your choice in the book.
RESPONSE
Howard Zinn’s “A People’s History of the United States” is openly biased. He makes this clear in his chapter “The Coming Revolt of the Guards” where he explains, “This makes it a biased account, one that leans in a certain direction. I am not troubled by that, because the mountain of history books under which we all stand leans so heavily in the other direction -- so tremblingly respectful of states and statesmen and so disrespectful, by inattention, to people's movements -- that we need some counterforce to avoid being crushed into submission.”
Zinn explains that all too often history is presented from the perspective of victors, not the victimized. He states that there is a drumbeat about students needing to learn facts and how it’s important to teach nothing but facts, facts, facts, but he explains there is no such thing as a pure fact innocent of interpretation. Behind every fact presented to the world is a judgment. The judgment that this fact is important and that other facts omitted are not.
Zinn’s book is written this way to address what Susan Edgerton calls the curriculum of marginality which is about excavating excluded stories. As she explains, excluding them in favor of happy or safe stories leads to apathy and violence. Zinn is bringing us the stories of those peoples who have traditionally been marginalized. Zinn explains that the consequence of omission is not simply to give a distorted view of the past, but more importantly to mislead us about the present. He writes to provide us with sides of stories not usually presented. The book illustrates the importance of reading this and all texts critically…thinking about whose story is being told and whose is not, considering the author’s political position, etc. It is far easier to do this though where the author has a clear an obvious position rather than one that claims pure objectivity.
The entire book stands as an example of how Zinn is writing from the perspective of the victimized and/or those who were omitted. He writes about the Constitution from the standpoint of the slaves, of Andrew Jackson as seen by the Cherokees, of the Civil War as seen by the New York Irish, and so on. I’ll provide as an example the opening chapter which looks at Columbus’s arrival in America from the perspective of the Arawaks. Zinn does a great job of portraying the atrocities of Columbus using quotes from source materials. He also provides us with insight into the culture of Arawaks as has not traditionally been done in textbooks.
Howard Zinn in A People’s History of the United States explains from what perspective (or bias, if you will) he chooses to write history. He also explains why he is doing that, and why that is one legitimate way in which to write history. Briefly recount his explanations, and offer an example of how he is doing that from a chapter of your choice in the book.
RESPONSE
Howard Zinn’s “A People’s History of the United States” is openly biased. He makes this clear in his chapter “The Coming Revolt of the Guards” where he explains, “This makes it a biased account, one that leans in a certain direction. I am not troubled by that, because the mountain of history books under which we all stand leans so heavily in the other direction -- so tremblingly respectful of states and statesmen and so disrespectful, by inattention, to people's movements -- that we need some counterforce to avoid being crushed into submission.”
Zinn explains that all too often history is presented from the perspective of victors, not the victimized. He states that there is a drumbeat about students needing to learn facts and how it’s important to teach nothing but facts, facts, facts, but he explains there is no such thing as a pure fact innocent of interpretation. Behind every fact presented to the world is a judgment. The judgment that this fact is important and that other facts omitted are not.
Zinn’s book is written this way to address what Susan Edgerton calls the curriculum of marginality which is about excavating excluded stories. As she explains, excluding them in favor of happy or safe stories leads to apathy and violence. Zinn is bringing us the stories of those peoples who have traditionally been marginalized. Zinn explains that the consequence of omission is not simply to give a distorted view of the past, but more importantly to mislead us about the present. He writes to provide us with sides of stories not usually presented. The book illustrates the importance of reading this and all texts critically…thinking about whose story is being told and whose is not, considering the author’s political position, etc. It is far easier to do this though where the author has a clear an obvious position rather than one that claims pure objectivity.
The entire book stands as an example of how Zinn is writing from the perspective of the victimized and/or those who were omitted. He writes about the Constitution from the standpoint of the slaves, of Andrew Jackson as seen by the Cherokees, of the Civil War as seen by the New York Irish, and so on. I’ll provide as an example the opening chapter which looks at Columbus’s arrival in America from the perspective of the Arawaks. Zinn does a great job of portraying the atrocities of Columbus using quotes from source materials. He also provides us with insight into the culture of Arawaks as has not traditionally been done in textbooks.
posted by book1 at 5:47 PM
1 Comments:
Once again another fabulous connection between books selected to be read for this semester.
I like that you point out the Zinn in his writing brought to light the issue of people who were traditionally marginalized. It was an interesting example that Zinn felt okay about being biased when speaking of "The Coming Revolt of the Guards" because he points out that there are stacks of books pointing to bias in the other direction.
Post a Comment
<< Home