Lies... chapter 4

Several things about Loewen writing style. Loewen repeatedly mentions the irony that the whites are referred as the “settlers” when the Native Indians were in truth the original inhabitants of Americas.  Although I was immensely fascinated by this designation when he first presented it, now its frequent appearance has started to slightly annoy me. I understand that he emphasizes this fact to convey the condescending attitude of the white people over the Native Indians; however, I thought that his purpose in writing this chapter is to argue that textbooks should not offer lopsided information that favour the white people, whereas I feel that he puts more attention in defending Native Indian rights. Loewen also contends that textbooks give definite dates and accounts and expect students to take in everything as it says, which robs students the opportunity to think critically. My history teacher specifically told us not to memorize any dates; she said they differ too much between different textbooks that she does not want us to think there is only one correct answer. Textbooks do not state that their facts are definite. Textbooks may limit other possibilities by mentioning only one single date; however, I think that authors are merely providing estimates and do not actually expect students to believe all of it. Authors are historians (I think), so surely they know that archaeological findings etc do not always denote one definite date or theory; however, if they did not include dates at all, that would also confuse students, so they provide estimates. Loewen implies that authors elude historical controversies, but if they laid out every possible theory that exists at the moment, the textbook would be too large and the content would confuse students, who would not know what to believe or where to begin with. Wouldn’t that make history class more boring? History should not be definite but too much vagueness can also be frustrating. I think just mentioning that there are alternative theories is enough. 

Still, I agree with many things that Loewen says in this chapter. He raised an interesting point that to the Native Americans, Europeans are the nomads, and this statement showed how narrow-minded some American textbooks are. Teachers always tell students to have a wide perspective on things, yet American textbooks seem to only view history from the white people’s point of view, and this is ironic. If the discrimination of Native Americans is still ongoing in the U.S., then students should be informed about how this came about since it would unfair to the Native Americans. I studied the War of 1812 in grade six and never did I learn that Indians were so involved in this war. There is nothing we can do to change the historical events in the past. As Loewen says, the point is not blaming our ancestors and their past actions, but to be equally informed about both sides (such as the white side and the Native American side so a fair judgement can be made. Yet, I think this is a normative statement in the Meiland term. In reality, what American textbook would equally provide the Native American side and the white side? If any American textbook author were to do this, the government would most probably prohibit such an “unnationalistic, anti-American” textbook to be published since it is an embarrassment to the country. I believe this applies to other countries as well. Then, is there any hope that a textbook that is not afraid to present its own country’s negative past will ever exist?

I thought it was interesting how Pocahontas is included in textbooks because I have heard that she was actually a victim of the invasion of English people into her community, the Powhatans. I was inquisitive and did a little research, and I found surprising facts. Pocahontas is known for saving an English man named John Smith and uniting the Native Americans and the English; however, she was actually taken prisoner by the English at the age of 17 and was held hostage for over a year. In exchange for her release, she had no choice but to marry a widower named John Ralfe, who used her for the propaganda campaign to support the colony. While heading to Virginia on a ship, she had to be taken off the ship and died there. As to her homeland, it was taken over by Ralfe and Smith even though the Powhatans had been kind to them. (information from the Powhatan Nation, http://www.powhatan.org/pocc.html) This information was provided by a Powhatan, so there is a possibility that it might be biased; however, considering all the information that American textbooks leave out or edit, it is no surprise if these facts about Pocahontas were true. Better yet, Disney changed this tragic story into a fairy tale where two people with different cultural backgrounds fall in love and happy-ever-after. Again, if Pocahontas led a life that the Powhatans claim she did, then Disney muddling with historical facts in favour of the white is highly disappointing and extremely rude to the Native Americans.