5 ms·
I would find this piece more convincing if it had sampled stories from different sources in service of its thesis rather than focusing on a single work the auth
by rectang 3y ago
I would find this piece more convincing if it had sampled stories from different sources in service of its thesis rather than focusing on a single work the author finds particularly galling, as there is no shortage of fictional narratives anywhere — look no further than US state-approved high-school history textbooks.
Given the narrowness of the material cited, this piece seems to me like unequal application of skepticism and status-quo gatekeeping.
- next_xibalba 3y ago> look no further than US state-approved high-school history textbooks. Care to practice what you preach? Which textbooks, specifically? How are they ahistorical?
- rectang 3y agoHere's an article which compares meta-narratives in Texas vs. California: https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/01/12/us/texas-vs-california-history-textbooks.html https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/01/12/us/texas-vs-c... Fights over textbook content are ancient and written about constantly. Since these battles are more heavily scrutinized outright falsehoods won't be found easily — rather meta-narratives are achieved by omission or emphasis. I would not argue that these meta-narratives are "ahistorical", though — rather, I would say that they reflect the interests of certain parties. Perspective is inseparable from "history".
- _gabe_ 3y ago> I would not argue that these meta-narratives are "ahistorical", though That seems to be what you were claiming though in your original comment: > as there is no shortage of fictional narratives anywhere — look no further than US state-approved high-school history textbooks.
- slau 3y agoAs I read this thread in the early morning before the family rouses, my tired eyes keep misreading “ahistorical” as “shitstorical”, which, amusingly enough, isn’t far off the intended meaning.
- bsder 3y agoThere is, sadly, a vast difference in accuracy between a "state-approved high school textbook" and a "peer-reviewed scholarly publication". A state-approved high-school textbook is subject to myriad business and political agendas that practically, by definition, compromise its truth and accuracy. A peer-reviewed scholarly publication is supposed to have a chain back to actual sources and facts that anchors it in spite of any agenda or narrative it may propound. The issue here is that Bulstrode presented a bunch of claims with no evidence or even contradicting evidence in the actual sources she cites. There are also some engineering issues: sugar mill rollers are oriented differently from steel mill rollers because they serve very different purposes. The comment from here was good: https://www.ageofinvention.xyz/p/age-of-invention-cort-case https://www.ageofinvention.xyz/p/age-of-invention-cort-case > Historians, myself included, often make leaps of intuition from limited evidence. But speculation ought to be explicitly signalled as such, rather than presented as certainty. Especially when that certainty creates a narrative so compelling that it makes major newspaper headlines. Bulstrode’s narrative requires multiple smoking guns to work, none of which are in the evidence she presents.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- harry8 3y agoAnytime school textbooks are mentioned I feel the urge to refer anyone who'll listen to the relevant chapter of "Surely You're Joking, Mr Feynman" Feynman is popular around here and rightly so. Blatant corruption from top to bottom is the norm, it would seem. Feynman also loathed psychology and gave it as an example of "Cargo-cult science." Last I heard every single first year psych texbook contained the Stanford prison experiment as an example without mentioning how it was total rubbish. Is that /still/ true in 2023? Textbooks are weird.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- hathchip 3y agoIronically "Surely You're Joking, Mr Feynman" is a great example of what the article talks about: compelling and repeatable stories whose basis in fact is often extremely dubious.
- harry8 3y agoIronically your story is dubious, but less compelling than Feynman's anecdotes. My comment is as cheap as yours for illustration purposes. I don't believe Feynman fabricated his stories of textbook corruption. Do you?
- hathchip 3y agoRegardless of what I believe, those stories are clearly not compelling evidence on which to build any kind of political argument.
- harry8 3y agoSo you don't believe it's a fabrication either and we can agree it doesn't make a strong case that reform is unnecessary and school textbooks are incapable of being improved. Of course the best evidence either way on the latter is the contents of textbooks that are actually being used. How did they get that way? Heard anything that might give us ideas on where to look a bit more closely?
- dataflow 3y ago> look no further than US state-approved high-school history textbooks. One could make just as good of a case about online users posting disparaging and speculative comments without presenting a shred of evidence, looking no farther than HN comments. Where does this kind of reasoning take us...?
- rectang 3y agoI cited textbooks because I figured their issues were well known, because numerous examples can be found across many political and social axes and thus we might avoid tumbling into a partisan hellhole, and because I knew I could back it up if I had to, as I already have in a sibling comment.
- dash2 3y agoHistorians are overwhelmingly on the left, so it’s not surprising most examples come from that. But if you wanted right wing dramatic narratives you could look at Niall Ferguson maybe.
- hef19898 3y agoEvery GOP backed US History book's chapter on slavery would be another example.
- newsclues 3y agoApparently Howard Zinn is largely responsible for the glorification of communist and vilification of fascism.
- hef19898 3y agoFacism is doing all its vilinification by itself. Thaz some people love it is a different question. Kudos so for writing comminist, and socialism.