I find myself constantly ragging on certain historical figures (i.e. General McClellan and his repeated follies) for their utter "stupidity" and blind "ignorance." I have to stop myself from falling into the common trap of what I've designated "The Omni-Historian." Having a 3rd person point-of-view history book, we are placed into a position of absolute knowledge. On that pedestal of omniscience and omnipresence, lifted up on an air of authority, we tend to judge, criticize, and condemn every strategical mistake in war or political slip-up in presidency.
There is always an inclination towards antagonizing one side of party meanwhile placing the other in a righteous light. We shun the South for its revolting practice of slavery and ignore the vital factors and conditions of the time. To the South, slavery was their lifeblood, their economic means. On the other hand, the North retains a holistic glow, despite their rigorous (though indirect) involvement and partaking of the slave-connected profit. We fail to truly put ourselves in their position, but rather walk in their shoes while retaining our curent all-knowing status.
Not only does it breach upon moral grounds of pompous superiority and even injustice to a degree, it taints our perception of history, infringing on our ability to grasp it in an unbiased and clear way. If we are to free ourselves from a narrow-minded, closed-off view of the world, we must first drop the binding chains of generalizing with sweeping conceptions. Instead, we need to adorn the tattered, worn-out boots of the men of Valley Forge, neglecting not a single hole on the faded leather. We need to cease the antagonist-protagonist argument and stop for a moment to consider what either side was fighting for and what they had to lose. Only if we accomplish this can we do justice to the historical events that has made us into what we are today.
I never really thought about how we're taught or exposed to history in a way that shines one side of an argument in a better light than another, but now that I've read this I can definitely see it. This post was very insightful, it opened up a new door of thought for me.
ReplyDeleteWowee, that's a really great point, it seems weird though very true. Though I'd have to disagree that history MUST be taken to a absolute third-person, expository point of view. As we know, not all history can be recording. History itself is an infinite concept, so as long as our perception of time exists. And as such, we cannot always determine the very thought processes, the very reasons for why something in our not-so-distant past occurs. Sure, it's overboard when you say Northern Saints and Southern Trash, but it's all part of history. It's noted that history is recalled, written or spoken. And as such, don't we see history, rather the past itself, as whatever we should believe it to be? So why not then? Why not believe in what we believe? Why not take towards the Axes?
ReplyDelete