History is told through a filter. Whether it is the filter of a persons mind or of a writer’s pen. Events such as the assassination of JFK, or for my generation the explosion of the Challenger have a way of burning themselves in our minds. We remember where we were, what we were doing, even what we were wearing.
One would think that the details of such an event would remain fairly accurate from person to person, however this is untrue. As in the example given in the reading selection after the Civil War ended some people only chose to remember the bravery of the white soldiers, not the reason brother was against brother. Some in the South tried to pretend that nothing had changed with the Lynch laws forcing slaves back onto the plantations. It seems that region as well as human thought was the influence of these ideals. A person can chose to remember an event as something that is painful or concentrate on the good of the event.
As with a persons memory of history being a filter so is that of a historian’s pen, even though the reasons vary. This can be traced back nearly to the beginning of written history, though most examples are taken from the early Catholic Church. Furthermore, factors of politics, region, and public opinion almost always have an effect on what becomes written history. “History came to play a major role in propagating this modern orthodoxy, particularly in the United States. And just because their national history was so integral to Americans’ identity, the new orthodoxy became part of the political conflicts generated by industrialization” (Appleby et al. , 132).
The Essay on top events of 1968
After reading through newspaper articles for the year 1968, I realized that the year was quite an eventful one. Politically, socially and economically speaking, the country endured a great deal of influential circumstances. Although the studying of vast articles from the New York Times succeeded in painting a clear, factual picture of that turbulent year, I was still eager to discover how ...
In contrast to remembering and writing what is more pleasant comes the historian who wants to tear down the pedestals that some of our great figures have been placed on. Charles Beard, a preeminent progressive historian set out to do just this to our founding fathers. “Getting these revered nation-builders at ground level, Beard then proceeded to go through their pockets and found that they were stuffed with government bonds which everyone knew would increase in value with stronger fiscal policies should the Articles of Confederation be superseded by a new frame of government. This proved to Beard that the Constitutional Convention had brought together… not an assembly of demigods… but self-interested politicians like those so conspicuous of today” (Appleby et al.
, 137).
