Take a photo of a barcode or cover
xcdo 's review for:
Lies My Teacher Told Me: Everything Your American History Textbook Got Wrong
by James W. Loewen
True rating: 4-4.5, rounding up for reasons in the review.
For anyone who’s interested in history beyond what’s taught in history classes, most of what Jon Loewen writes about isn’t a surprise - it’s unsurprising that history textbooks omit a bit of history and often serve a certain narrative, but the way that Loewen lays out his argument is his survey of history books over times continues to have the same blind spots, and is even more damning when the credited authors don’t recall their own input (or lack thereof). It’s an interesting analysis into what we consider to be “textbook material”, and certainly raises questions about what should be part of necessary study material in required education. I enjoyed his thoughts about alternative ways to teach history, and found some of it reflected in my own history education looking back.
His line of thinking about approaching major time periods in history is interesting, and shows that it’s not just rose-colored lenses on far past or more recent history. But, it does show how history can (and is) influenced by those in power, namely white and wealthy. This is meant to be an anti-racist book, so by pointing out things like the existence of Indian plagues before European settlement in America isn’t meant to be a liberal education point - it simply points out that there’s a reason why a vast culture existed before “America”, and why settlement was perhaps easier than settling from scratch. This can read more political when it comes to talking about presidential political decisions and civil rights (from Abraham’s strategic support of abolition despite not being a believer in equal rights himself, to the government countermoves to the civil rights movement), but I don’t think it’s more political to detail more of the situation and context. But the vocabulary and way written is explicitly anti-racist, which can probably be uncomfortable for some readers. I suggest taking a step back, and some time to digest, before deciding whether the example actually is political or not.
In the larger education discussion, I thought it was interesting how he approached the dove vs. hawk question between the highly educated and less educated American public, and also thinking about the impact on political party makeup at the time. It certainly colors how we see recent past like the Vietnam and Korean Wars, but still carries impact into the current day. Something that he brought up is that despite his “liberal agenda”, typically anti-racist and nonconformist teaching is done at wealthier and elite schools, meaning that the so-called “white elite” may or may not have a hand in what’s actually taught in America. I think he started his analysis off with an interesting hypothesis about marketability and the value of donors of education, but wonder if it should be its own book talking more broadly about the creation of textbooks/its differences from academia despite drawing heavily from it?
Overall really enjoyed reading this! A lot to talk about and I enjoyed sharing tidbits I was reading with others. But do warned - it is dense and I recommend taking your time. Also take advantage of the wealth of cited resources!
For anyone who’s interested in history beyond what’s taught in history classes, most of what Jon Loewen writes about isn’t a surprise - it’s unsurprising that history textbooks omit a bit of history and often serve a certain narrative, but the way that Loewen lays out his argument is his survey of history books over times continues to have the same blind spots, and is even more damning when the credited authors don’t recall their own input (or lack thereof). It’s an interesting analysis into what we consider to be “textbook material”, and certainly raises questions about what should be part of necessary study material in required education. I enjoyed his thoughts about alternative ways to teach history, and found some of it reflected in my own history education looking back.
His line of thinking about approaching major time periods in history is interesting, and shows that it’s not just rose-colored lenses on far past or more recent history. But, it does show how history can (and is) influenced by those in power, namely white and wealthy. This is meant to be an anti-racist book, so by pointing out things like the existence of Indian plagues before European settlement in America isn’t meant to be a liberal education point - it simply points out that there’s a reason why a vast culture existed before “America”, and why settlement was perhaps easier than settling from scratch. This can read more political when it comes to talking about presidential political decisions and civil rights (from Abraham’s strategic support of abolition despite not being a believer in equal rights himself, to the government countermoves to the civil rights movement), but I don’t think it’s more political to detail more of the situation and context. But the vocabulary and way written is explicitly anti-racist, which can probably be uncomfortable for some readers. I suggest taking a step back, and some time to digest, before deciding whether the example actually is political or not.
In the larger education discussion, I thought it was interesting how he approached the dove vs. hawk question between the highly educated and less educated American public, and also thinking about the impact on political party makeup at the time. It certainly colors how we see recent past like the Vietnam and Korean Wars, but still carries impact into the current day. Something that he brought up is that despite his “liberal agenda”, typically anti-racist and nonconformist teaching is done at wealthier and elite schools, meaning that the so-called “white elite” may or may not have a hand in what’s actually taught in America. I think he started his analysis off with an interesting hypothesis about marketability and the value of donors of education, but wonder if it should be its own book talking more broadly about the creation of textbooks/its differences from academia despite drawing heavily from it?
Overall really enjoyed reading this! A lot to talk about and I enjoyed sharing tidbits I was reading with others. But do warned - it is dense and I recommend taking your time. Also take advantage of the wealth of cited resources!