This post is closely related to my June 19 article regarding critical race theory (CRT). Most of the legislation seeking to curtail the teaching of CRT has included criticism of The 1619 Project as well. CRT and “1619” both raise the question of how history is understood and taught.
The Problem of Microhistory
Each one of
us has our own personal history, which should, one would think, be rather
straightforward and non-problematic. But in writing my life story, now available in print, some historical “facts” came under
question. June did not remember some of our family history the same way I did.
The two siblings in Ann Patchett’s intriguing book The Dutch House
(2019) discuss their family’s microhistory. One asks, “Do you think it’s
possible to ever see the past as it actually was?” The other reflects on how we
humans
overlay the present onto the past. We look back through the lens of what we know now, so we’re not seeing it as the people we were, we’re seeing it as the people we are, and that means the past has been radically altered (p. 45).
The Problem of Macrohistory
Recently I
also read The Sense of an Ending (2011) by British author Julian Barnes. In that novel, one “high school” student remarks, “History is the lies
of the victors.” The teacher retorts that “it is also the self-delusions of the
defeated.”
At that
point, the most brilliant student in the class says, rather cynically, “History
is that certainty produced at the point where the imperfections of memory meet
the inadequacies of documentation” (pp. 16-17).
If that is true
in personal or family history; it is especially true in writing macrohistory. But
the problem is more than just the imperfections of memory and the inadequacies
of documentation.
The most
serious problem is the biases of the historians and the conscious or
unconscious interpretation of past events for the benefit of a particular
segment of society.
Thus, the
squabble over The 1619 Project continues.
U.S. History: “1619” or “1776”?
In 2019, The New York Times Magazine published
The 1619 Project, developed by journalist Nikole Hannah-Jones and others.
The year 1619 was when the first African
slaves set foot in North America. The 1619 Project, then, “aims to reframe the
country's history by placing the consequences of slavery and the contributions
of Black Americans at the very center of the United States’ national
narrative" (from this
link).
The 1619 Project was strongly criticized by
politicians such as former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich (see
here) and Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.), who proposed the Saving of American History
Act of 2020 (see
here), and especially by former Pres. Trump.
On the day before the 2020 presidential
election, by executive order DJT established the 1776 Commission. Republican
politicians continue to praise the flawed 1776 Commission report and to
castigate The 1619 Project.
The “1776 Pledge to Save Our
Schools” is being signed by numerous politicians, such as the two current Republican
gubernatorial candidates in Kansas, who were rebuked by an editorial
in the June 28 issue of the Kansas City Star.
There are some obvious problems with The 1619
Project, including some historical inaccuracies (as noted in this 3/6/20
Politico article). It also fails to link the beginning of U.S. history to
the mistreatment of Native Americans (as this 9/26/20
opinion piece explains).
But most who oppose teaching CRT and “1619” want to shield students from much of the “ugly” history of the past. They need to consider, though, the truth of the following meme. (The painting depicts some dreadful history of Canada’s First Nations children, similar to what happened in the U.S.)
**Of the many articles I have read related to this post, I am linking here to only one, Eugene Robinson’s 6/28 opinion piece in The Washington Post, which is accessible here without a paywall. The sixth paragraph on is directly about The 1619 Project.
Local Thinking Friend David Nelson was the first to send comments on this new blog post:
ReplyDelete"Thanks for this reflection. The opening voice over line of the movie 'Great Expectations' is 'I will tell you this story not as it happened but as I remember it.' Perhaps that is the best we can do alone. But then we must read and reflect with the help of people like you."
Thanks for your comments, David.
DeleteThose of us who have a shared history gain in understanding that history by learning from one another. If that is true in microhistory matters, it surely must be true in macrohistory matters also. That is why Whites in the U.S. need to take seriously the insights/experiences of People of Color in seeking to gain a more adequate understanding of the history of our nation.
Here are comments from Thinking Friend Eric Dollard in Chicago:
ReplyDelete"Thanks, Leroy, for your comments about the teaching of history.
"Teaching history will always be somewhat controversial, but the Republicans and Fox News have now politicized it. CRT has been characterized as a plot to ignite a Marxist revolution in America or as an instigator of reverse racism. That is nonsense and so is the charge that CRT is being taught in our schools. The facts of history need to be taught in our schools, regardless of what label is used. Some of those facts are not pretty.
The Republicans want to whitewash our history and they are using the label "CRT" to justify it. It is sad, frustrating, and tiring to have to constantly fight lies, misinformation, false labeling, and the politicization of what should be non-issues, but the Republicans, Fox News, and malevolent posts on social media remain relentless.
America's glory is its Constitution. America's tragedy is its failure to ensure that the rights and privileges guaranteed by the Constitution are extended to all of its people."
Thanks for your comments, Eric.
DeleteAs you have likely heard, 120 House Republicans yesterday voted to keep the statues of Confederates in the Capitol. Commenting on that matter, House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy criticized Democrats as hypocrites on race. He said, "The Democratic Party has doubled down on what I consider this shameful history by replacing the racism of the past with the racism of the critical race theory."
Hi Leroy:
ReplyDeleteI'm disadvantaged to make an intelligent reply to your blog as I'm not familiar with what is being taught in our schools about the role of slavery and the course of racism in this country. The only thing I remember in my own American history education is that slavery was a fact and slaves were mistreated. I remember that slavery was a part of the southern economy. I was more familiar with segregation as an existential experience rather than the material in text books. I well remember that blacks had to sit in the back of the bus and use separate water fountains and restrooms. I remember that blacks had to sit in the balconies in theatres and that churches were segregated. As a young adult, it bothered me that we sent missionaries to Africa and then when they accepted Christ, they couldn't attend our universities and seminaries. You and I both lived during that period in history when great changes were made in the status and opportunities for people of color. We are still making progress and it is a tragedy if the truth of that painful pilgrimage is not being taught to our youth.
Truett Baker
I am overwhelmed by the painting displayed with this blog, "The Scream" by Kent Monkman (2017). In its way, it is more unsettling than Edvard Munch's 1893 surrealistic horror. Obviously Monkman knew about the native children's "assimilation" before the current wave of horror stories from Canada about the hundreds of unmarked graves found at former church boarding schools. Of course, before we Americans could get too smug, the string of stories was interrupted by a nearly identical story coming out of Minnesota. For those not familiar with Munch's painting, you can read more here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Scream
ReplyDeleteWhen I was a boy I had an elegant model of a Canadian Mountie riding his horse. I never ceased to be thrilled when I saw it. It just radiated so much good. Now I see the new "The Scream" as a mother responds to the seizure of her child. Fortunately, my Mountie is long lost in the mists of time, so I will not have to confront him on my shelf. And there are all those priests and nuns helping with the seizure. I may have to read some more Dostoyevsky to cheer myself up. Perhaps the Grand Inquisitor can explain it all to me!
History is full of pain and tragedy. Too many have focused on the triumphalism of history, i.e. winning wars, and the 'glory' of the doctrine of discovery.
ReplyDeleteI think we have to be more honest about writing history from a 'reader's response criticism' point of view-hence the myth of black and white, objective history written by elitists. Canadian schools and museums, etc., are now incorporating more First Nations' histories into the curriculum, which was long overdue.
The Scream accurately depicts the forceful stealing of Indigenous children by both the Mounties and nuns and clergy-mostly Roman Catholic and Anglican. Some of those children were as young as 3 or 4 years old. The trauma they suffered is unspeakable, and likely killed many of them. The road to reconciliation and actively, genuinely implementing the calls to action from the TRC will be long and, I think painful. Hopefully it will happen by the grace of God.
Garth, I much appreciate what you posted here, and I apologize for being so slow to express my appreciation. It seems to me that you Canadians have done a much better job in recognizing and seeking to deal with problems of the past in much more fruitful ways than has been done here in the U.S.
DeleteBro. Leroy, I recently finished a biography of James Madison, one of my favorite presidents. It was edited by Merrill Peterson: James Madison, A Biography in His Own Words. Only a small portion of the book was written by the editor. Primarily it consisted of the letters and other writings of Madison. I found it fascinating that what I had learned of Madison in high school and college courses was a shallow overview of the man. It didn't destroy my image of our fourth president, but I did get insights into his dilemmas and his weaknesses. Perhaps our history should be taught more from the actual words of its participants and less from our later interpretations at least as far as possible. And yes, American history should be taught from all perspectives not from 1776, nor from 1619, but beginning with the time before the first Europeans stepped foot on this continent and who then began to change the existing culture. That too is a part of our history
ReplyDeleteThanks, Tom, for sharing this--and I appreciate your interest in James Madison. I wrote about him in my Dec. 15, 2011, and July 5, 2012, blog posts, but I'm sure you know a lot more about him than I do. I think what I said about him in those two blog articles was correct, but I would be interested to know if you think I misrepresented him in any way.
Delete