Lies... Chapter 2

When I read this chapter about Columbus, I was not too astonished about Columbus’s merciless behaviour towards the Native Indians, Africans, and the Haitians because it was not the first time to hear of such treatment. I was taught about the violent, unjust treatment of the Aztecs by the Spanish explorer Cortes whom the Aztec leader thought was a god because Cortes brought horses and guns, which were new to the Aztecs. The Aztecs welcomed Cortes and his crews; however, when Cortes compelled the Aztecs to convert to Christianity, the Aztecs refused, so Cortes massacred the place and took the gold, of course. Columbus’s story closely resembles this one. It is strange that Cortes’s story is more famous than Columbus’s. Perhaps it is because Columbus is “supposed to be” the first discoverer of Americas and American textbook authors are particular about keeping this figure unsullied and unstained as much as possible.  

I believe Loewen was more successful in this chapter in persuading me that textbooks need to include more accurate details because it included many supporting evidence that were derived from primary sources. For example, to support his assertion that Asians and Africans may have discovered the Americas before Columbus, he mentioned of organic materials painted with faces similar to Africans found in the east coast of Mexico, which is a fairly reliable source.

When Loewen pointed out that information in some history textbooks contradict with others, I thought that was a little ridiculous although some of them were comical, to be honest. In fact, I enjoyed reading this section the most. Nevertheless, I fail to understand the intention of textbook authors who decide to include anyway the information that they are uncertain of. For example, some textbooks say that during Columbus’s journey the sea was peaceful while the others declare that it was storm-battered. This addition of melodrama may be a kind of entertainment fit for fiction books, but not for history books that are supposed to be filled with credible materials. Ultimately, I have become confused about the making of history textbooks. I felt as if textbooks are somewhat like Wikipedia where “history experts” can easily alter the information that the public sees. Loewen mentions that some of the details that authors invent are harmless. I think that depends on how you interpret “harmless” since these are undoubtedly filling the students’ brains with false information which cannot be “harmless”. However, I felt that some of them are quite detrimental. For example, Loewen asserts that some American textbooks include that the “bad” Turks cut off trade with Europe. He conjectures that authors may have included this to provide evidence for Islam followers’ irrational behaviours. If Loewen’s conjecture is correct, and if this, in any way, contributes to increase the tension between Islamic people and the Americans, then this manipulation is much dire than one thinks it is as it might be interfering with international affairs.

When we judge history textbooks, I felt that we should take nationalism into account. Loewen emphasized countless times that American textbooks were “Eurocentric”. I believe that it is natural for people to be nationalistic. For example, when we watch the soccer World Cup, we want our country to win.  It may be difficult finding the middleground to satisfy both sides-the white side and the non-white side when selecting which materials to be included in history textbooks. Too much inclusion of white people’s accomplishments degrade the non-white people. I am going to digress a little, but I studied about WWII in a Canadian high school, and my teacher tacitly implied to the class that U.S had no choice but to drop the bombs in Hiroshima because Japan’s menacing power had to be hindered. I was appalled because my teacher taught the material as if the U.S. was justified in bombing Japan, which is certainly not what is thought by the Japanese people. So that may be what the non-white people feel when the U.S. textbooks are so “Eurocentric”.  On the other hand, too much emphasis on the coloured people may cause some white people to receive criticism from “Eurocentric” people, as Loewen mentioned. I believe there is presumably not a single American history textbook that satisfies everyone, and nor will there be any.