I just watched National Treasure. And guess what. I’m not annoyed. It was fun. It was farcical and there was enough real history woven in to allow me to suspend my disbelief, relax and enjoy the ride. That’s what Disney does best, right? Give you a ride.
I started thinking, though, of how we tend to oversimplify history. I was reading a blog entry today about the five most environmentally-friendly presidents. Of course, the whole article was oversimplified. Theodore Roosevelt, my personal favorite and traditional hero of the environment was a big game hunter. And a very prolific one. Yet he did set aside land to be protected. Lincoln was also listed. In the comments section, there were two people arguing over whether Lincoln should really be called the Great Emancipator. Annoyed Person A says no and Annoyed Person B says yes, it’s a technicality, but we should still be able to call him that, etc, etc. History, especially people, are never black and white.
Lincoln freed the slaves.
Christopher Columbus discovered America.
Edison invented electricity.
All of these statements are somewhat true and yet all are somewhat false. It’s strange. As a student of history, I’ve been dedicated to uncovering the “facts” — unraveling the fabric of history to see a complete picture of an event, or a person, or whatever. You learn something in elementary school and then you get to college, read Howard Zinn and realize that everything is not what it seems. You feel cheated. And then you get angry. Or at least I did.
But now I’m starting to understand that sometimes we do need to oversimplify things. Just ask any parent who’s had to answer a barrage of questions from a three-year-old about why the sky is blue. Because the real answer is a spiderweb. This thread leads to that one and you can’t understand that one unless you tug at another, seemingly unlinked thread. But in the end you find that they’re all linked. No event is as simple as it sounds. Yet you could spend years trying to figure out the truth. And so we must, in the end, break it down to the barest essentials and let the truly curious tug at the threads and see what they find.
And not everybody cares. I tug. I look things up. I read. But I know how. I spent a good deal of money on a Master’s degree to teach me how to do it. And when I’m confronted with a grossly oversimplifed statement about something that happened in the past, I grit my teeth, smile and try to educate the person without coming off as a condescending bitch. Assuming I know what the “real” story is. It’s hard. And I’m learning to let go. And so I enjoyed National Treasure. Nicolas Cage and all.
But don’t get me started on Edison. Or Gangs of New York. Because those two topics really get me fired up.
4 Comments
February 29, 2008 at 11:36 pm
Yes, but it is exactly that hunger for uncovering “the facts — you know, the real ones” that makes you so special. I suffer from that affliction as well. I cannot tell you how many times while watching the news I hear something said by a reporter or anchorperson that is simply an incorrect statement of fact. That’s when I indignantly break out the old, “… but why let the facts get in the way of a good story” lament.
Still, it’s good to be able to suspend belief and enjoy a break from dealing with the inaccuracies of others. Glad to hear you’re able to do it.
March 2, 2008 at 12:39 am
A wealth of knowledge is great, but the ability to definitively extract facts from fiction, urban legend or misconceptions is even better.
Despite my lack any accredited certificates certifying my knowledge, I do appreciate people that possess them because they often share their knowledge and vast insight on a variety of subjects.
Fortunately and unfortunately, with Wikipedia facts can found with minimal effort, so abstract learning doesn’t always take place. Believe me, even though I detested research papers, I did feel a sense of accomplishment that I knew everything. I wonder what technology holds in the future for education.
March 2, 2008 at 8:13 pm
I agree that National Treasure was an entertaining move.
TR is also one of my favorite presidents. However, I don’t think hunting should disqualify anyone as an environmentalist. With fewer natural predators, hunting is important to keep deer populations under control. Plus, a lot of hunters eat the meat.
March 8, 2008 at 8:39 am
As a former history teacher, I am glad to hear that National Treasure doesn’t distort the facts too bad. I’m especially glad because parts of it were filmed in my home state of South Dakota. This means the film industry’s two movies shot in South Dakota last year were relatively historically accurate.
The other film, Into the Wild, was partially filmed in Carthage, SD, a small town in the same county I’ve worked in for the last twelve years.
I’m glad you created a link to the original story on the top environmental presidents. I had to check out the conversation on Lincoln’s emancipation of the slaves because I spent three years living in one of the few communities where the Emancipation Proclamation actually freed slaves – Beaufort, SC.
Because Beaufort was controlled by the Union troops for almost the entire duration of the Civil War (see the movie Glory and the story of the 54th Massachusetts’ Regiment, also pretty accurate), the Proclamation was read to slaves under a huge old oak tree in Beaufort – and it actually meant something.
For anyone who claims that the Emancipation Proclamation was meaningless, I’d tell them to imagine the emotions going through the minds of those African-Americans standing or sitting around that tree!
But the saddest part of that story is not that the Proclamation didn’t free all the slaves at that moment in history; the saddest part is that the Beaufort community today largely doesn’t know or celebrate the fact that this incredible moment took place in their community.
Sorry about the unsolicited history lesson, but I’d don’t get much of a chance to share it now that I no longer teach.