User login

Syndicate

XML feed

Who's online

There are currently 0 users and 70 guests online.

Poll

What Is Your Trump Card World View?
Secular Humanist
0%
Cosmic Humanist
0%
Biblical Christian
0%
Hedonist
0%
Aristotelian
100%
Total votes: 2

Lies My Teacher Told Me Review

Submitted by seth on January 25, 2006 - 12:50pm.
cover of Lies My Teacher Told MeLies My Teacher Told Me

ASIN: 1402579373
Binding: Audio CD
List price: $29.99 USD
Amazon price: $20.69 USD


Lies My Teacher Told Me is a very interesting historical revision of what discreprencies are found in American History text books. Undoubtedly, the author has a political agenda. He focuses on retelling American history through the eyes of American minorities and disadvantaged citizens. The perspective is fascinating yet it has an air of exaggeration to it. The reason I selected this book in my audio library is because the premise. Lies My Teacher Told Me is about how text books tell American History.

The author’s premise is a very daring look at the way education is distributed to our youth. I found it fascinating. However, there are a lot of problems with Loewen’s message. He explains omissions of American History to be a result of "racism" and "eurocentrism". He continues to bash the patriotic zeal of American History as a way to make white middle class children to feel good about themselves. Although the bare content is very interesting and has already helped to reshape my opinion of American History, I feel very skeptical of every fact the author states because of the overbearing liberal tone he takes with his material.

If you feel confident with your ability to discern Loewen's facts from his radical interpretation of original sources, then this book has a valuable perspective which at the very least provides a different viewpoint.

Although the author argues that we should tell a more complete account of the good and bad of our nation’s decisions, he doesn’t seem to have anything "good" to say about it himself. His reinterpretations of America’s favorite historical characters are redefined as racist, greedy, and often morally bankrupt. He prefers history textbooks give the “real facts�? rather than a "watered down" version of “feel good history�?. He calls this history ethnocentric. Because it calls Europeans the “settlers�? which disregard the fact that Native Americans had settled the same land thousands of years earlier. He paints Thomas Jefferson as a hypocrite. Renouncing slavery publicly, yet owning several hundred slaves.

Loewen provocatively argues that omitting the blemishes of our past only bores students and squanders valuable opportunities for students to question decisions rather than to accept our nation’s leaders as omniscient. He believes that students would engage history passionately if only provided with a “truthful�? version of history which presents history as a question rather than dates to be “memorized�?.

I enjoyed the author’s insistence that students should ask if we made good or bad decisions rather than memorize facts and pretend that our nation’s past is beyond reproach. The way that textbooks teach history is unarguably sterilized. It is as if we are always progressing. Everything in our past is “building a better tomorrow�?. This kind of history benefits no one and makes history boring because it removes the conflict inherent to the field.

Unfortunately, Loewen superimposes a lot of political spin on the way he interprets the content left out of textbooks. Had Loewen exercised a bit more self-control in ranting about social injustice from a very Marxist view point, this would be a very great read for everyone interested in the future of American education. Despite the political ranting, the questions asked by Loewen add value to the great debate about how and what we should teach our children. Worthwhile book if you can tolerate the skewed propaganda.



Submitted by Nicholas Garber (not verified) on October 5, 2007 - 11:03pm.

your review is dead on... exactly what I would have had to say about this book, except more coherent. thank you!

Submitted by David Malone (not verified) on August 6, 2008 - 8:21am.

A balanced review. My son will attend Belmont Univ this fall. This book is on the required list for freshman. With such a provocative title I decided to read reviews of the book. The first two were a whole- hearted agreement with the author's premise. They were absent of critical thought. Your particular review was 1 of 2 that was thoughtfully analytical, finding positives from the author, yet aware of the political bent and accurately addressing the bias. I'm giving this reveiw to my son before he attends his first class of leftist indoctrination!

Post new comment

*
*
The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.


*

  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
  • Glossary terms will be automatically marked with links to their descriptions
 

When he gave us our air-rifles Atticus wouldn't teach us to shoot. Uncle Jack instructed us in the rudiments thereof; he said Atticus wasn't interested in guns. Atticus said to Jem, "I'd rather you shot at tin cans in the back yard, but I know you'll go after birds. Shoot all the bluejays you want, if you can hit 'em, but remember it's a sin to kill a mockingbird." That was the only time I ever hear Atticus say it was a sin to do something, and I asked Miss Maudie about it. "You're father's right," she said. "Mockingbirds don't do one thing but make music for us to enjoy. They don't eat up people's gardens, don't nest in corncribs, they don't do one thing but sing their hearts out for us. That's why it's a sin to kill a mocking bird." (98)

— Harper Lee

Recent Blog Entries

Recent Forum Topics

Recent Comments