Rating: 
Summary: Some good points, but too long in places.
Review: The author made several very good points early in the book. I raced through the first half of the book. And I am not a history buff. He did go into great detail, sometimes too much detail that it became redundant at times. Later sections of the book, were too me very poorly substantiated. The last half of the book took more effort to read. Not as much fun for me. The author appeared to be trying to further his own agenda at times, instead of taking a more balanced approach that I had expected. Even though he did admit the appearance of bias in some points of the book. He said this was to overcome the lack of objectivity of history books in the past. However, all the points the author mentioned were well worth presenting to a average or advanced American History class. Every history teacher in the USA should read this book.
Rating:
Summary: Makes history more interesting for me
Review: I think most people in our culture get some sort of high from iconoclasm and indignation. This book certainly provides that, starting with its confrontational title and continuing through its text. I really enjoyed this book and learned fascinating bits and pieces of history as I went along. The part about Columbus, of course, was one of the more disturbing, absurd, and compelling parts.Criticisms of this book as "politically correct" seem off the mark to me. It should never be considered merely politically correct to try to examine the viewpoints and histories of people other than the dominant majority (assuming that's what people mean about the book) -- it should be normal sensitivity. However, some more interesting criticisms I've seen point out that this book makes some claims about the teaching of history that may not be correct, and has its own political biases. I think these are at least partly true, but the book seems valuable to me nonetheless, because it points out so many things that I wouldn't otherwise know, notice, or see the significance of.
Rating:
Summary: Not Bad
Review: Loewen shows some liberal bias in his writing however this book is defintely not liberal revisionism. While I did not learn much from this work a few close friends have adjusted their viewpoints after a reading or two. Those who cite that every nation on earth has been guilty of atrocities at one time or another have a very weak argument because we are supposed to be above that. Placing the blame for atrocities in which the US government took part on anyone besides the involved agencies and politicians of the government is akin to saying that it is ok to be an accomplice to a crime if you are not aware a crime is taking place. Which is fine - sometimes that happens and I believe that ignorance is a valid excuse. However I would hope that everyone would like their government to be held more accountable for it's actions than it's citizens. Loewen does a fantastic job of dispelling deification of individuals. He isn't saying that all of our forefathers were evil men and women. Instead he is pointing out that it is time to stop teaching crap and time to start looking at historical figures as fallable individuals. I think that Helen Keller's political beliefs in her later life ARE important because the political beliefs of a person tend to line up with their experiences. I DO NOT agree with Helen Keller's political beliefs at all but I am smart enough to realize why she held them so dearly. The only people I do not recommend this book to are those with closed minds. If you are on the far left or right and you have a closed mind you will gain nothing by reading this book. To those that have been paying attention this book should come as no surprise. What this book really says is that government schooling (read the public school system) is bad (although Loewen may not realize that...I don't know the author's beliefs). At the very least cover it all high school historical factoid textbooks should be abandoned in favor of real history texts (Which this book is not...this book is a critique of high school history books). If you must know I am a Libertarian.
Rating: 
Summary: A Dryer, Dustier Book than Any History Text
Review: This book's cover suggests an excursion through US History to show what realy happened and what gets commonly taught in schools. Instead, it is a humorless, plodding, neverending series of the author's views of what is "important" in history as compared with the versions found in various textbooks he reviewed. And again. And again. And again. This book alone could turn anyone off the subject of US history. If you want a good book, try "Don't Know Much About History" (I think that's the name) which covers a similar subject with wit and charm.
Rating:
Summary: revisionist U.S. history and the sociology of history
Review: I found this book fascinating: partly for the great amount of historical information that despite my liberal education I had missed; partly for the author's quite convincing explanations of why high school history textbooks are so poor; and mostly for the once again convincing explanations of why the recent past is simply not covered in history classes. The Vietnam War and why it is left out is covered at length in the book. Second wave feminism is another topic of incredible importance to youth today, and yet it is not in the curriculum except in gender studies; Professor Loewen doesn't make as much of this issue, but it is a good starting point. Well worth reading.
Rating:
Summary: Great Read!
Review: The first several chapters of this book were great! As a historian, I cringe every time I meet a high school student who has memorized their history text as gospel. Loewen presents the history of our nation with harsh realism. My only negative comments about this book (with regards to History) is that the author really becomes a "sociologist" in the last several chapters, and the tone of the book changes from a critism of history texts and teachings, to a criticism of the society at the time. Whenever you are studying history you have to keep in mind that today's ideals are NOT yesterday's ideals. He only points this out once in the entire novel. In short, a great book, but it gets rather preachy toward the end!
Rating: 
Summary: Eye opening even for a history major
Review: I read a critical take from some yahoo who found it unpatriotic. What a stupid analysis! If you only love the make-believe America, you don't love the real thing. (Duh!) And this book faults the textbooks for ignoring the good as well as the bad! In particular, it does a great job with Lincoln and the fact that antiracism was, for a time, stronger than racism. Look- this stuff is true. I happen to believe that our country is something special, but ignoring the terrible things in our history is dishonest. And every major high school text book does ignore the terrible things and is dishonest. The nature of that dishonesty has real implications for our future. Do you want education or indoctrination? Do you want sheep or citizens? The right wingers who push these horrible, bland, boring texts want indoctrination- much like Lenin did in the Soviet Union. I think our kids can handle the truth.
Rating:
Summary: A MUST for parents and educators.
Review: In *Lies My Teacher Told Me*, sociologist James W. Loewen looks at twelve popular American history textbooks used in public high schools today and concludes that they are inexcusably inaccurate and biased. He shows that, in addition to their being sloppy and error-prone due to incompetence, textbooks oversimplify historical facts and causes, obscure the process by which historical interpretations are made and revised over time, perpetuate national myths and even willfully lie. Often, Loewen reveals, this is done in the service of promoting blind patriotism in students or in capitulation to various interest groups and other pressures that work to undermine the professionalism and integrity of the textbook industry itself. A multitude of examples from actual textbooks used today will likely disabuse many lay readers--including many high school teachers, according to cited studies of their expertise in their own field--of cherished but wrong beliefs. Some readers will object to Loewen's obvious "liberal bias." There is a case to be made for this. I, for one, would like to see a deconstruction of textbooks' pervasive anti-capitalistic mentality. Is it honest history, for example, to mention the antitrust suit against Standard Oil but not to mention the fact that its business practices did not harm consumers but benefited them? Or that many of the reforms of the Progressive Era--the Meat Inspection Act and the Pure Food and Drug Act, to name but two--were lobbied for by "big business" (appropriate here, but what a loaded term!) to throttle their competitors? Or that there is more than one theory of the causes of the Great Depression--and that Franklin Delano Roosevelt's New Deal only prolonged it? But, no matter. Such criticisms are beside the point. False and careless statements like "President Truman 'easily settled' the Korean War by dropping the atomic bomb"--a real example from a textbook--are simply not open to dispute on grounds of ideology. And while some of Loewen's other examples of textbook distortion (or his proposed remedies) are questionable, enough are valid that he makes his general case. All of us, liberals, conservatives or otherwise, should be able to agree that to teach a one-dimensional, "Disney version of history" (as Loewen calls it), in which complexities and controversies are smoothed over or ignored and students' understanding of causality in history is impaired, is plain wrong. Loewen also tries--and not necessarily with an outsider's perspective, as he himself is a high school history textbook author, who knows firsthand the near futility of publishing a textbook of integrity--to explain the causes of our American history textbook troubles. In this connection, I must say that the *Booklist* editorial review that Amazon.com has posted to this webpage is misleading. The review states that "To account for the deplorable situation, he [Loewen] offers this quasi-Marxist explanation: 'Perhaps we are all dupes, manipulated by elite white male capitalists who orchestrate how history is written as part of their scheme to perpetuate their own power and privilege at the expense of the rest of us.'" But even Dr. Loewen is not *that* bad. Contrary to the review's implication, he ultimately dismisses this "elitist" explanation as an oversimplification, stating that "power elite theories may credit the upper class with more power, unity, and conscious self-interest than it has." He then discusses other explanations, such as the way textbooks are chosen--often by state-appointed adoption boards, which are sensitive to organized interest groups out to promote textbooks that further their own agendas, and which never have time to read 800+-page textbooks, in any case. Blame is also laid on textbook publishers, which have a financial incentive to copy success (i.e., traditional, mediocre textbooks) and to refrain from rocking the boat by being original and, thus, possibly arousing controversy; textbook authors, who for a variety of reasons have no incentive to do quality work; and teachers, many of whom aren't as expert in their subject as they should be or are afraid (not without good reason) of getting into trouble with parents and administrators should they teach against the book. Loewen's full account, which is fairly complex and discerning, of the various factors that interact to produce our high school American history textbooks, I leave for the reader to examine. In closing, I would like to observe, in regard to the aforementioned ridiculous review by *Booklist*, that if one looks at *Booklist's* webpage, one sees that the publication itself is responsible for the review of textbooks that are used in public schools. Given this fact, the disrespectful, dismissive, even dishonest, treatment it accords *Lies My Teacher Told Me* should not surprise us. How ironic it is that Dr. Loewen's point has been made for him here, in this very forum, by his opponents.
Rating:
Summary: Useful and well written
Review: Fairly free of polemics, yet passionate and revealing. Useful for HS US history teachers.
Rating:
Summary: A Vision of Truth
Review: I'm glad Mr. Loewen took the time to put all this information in a people-friendly book. Had I not already stumbled onto the works of Howard Zinn (A PEOPLE'S HISTORY OF THE UNITED STATES), I would have been considerably more shocked by this book. It covers all the misinformation currently offered by textbooks on American History. The most important point he makes, is that we don't have to turn our heroes into mythological icons for their accomplishments. They are people like us, after all, and prone to as many personal mistakes as anyone else. The majority of history texts state only the great accomplishments and events, without reference to circumstances. Perhaps this is why history is a difficult subject for many. Listing names and dates is devoid of any human interest that would cause students to remember and question what happened and why. If we continue to serve up whitewashed versions of the real histoy of America, how are students ever going to feel the passions at the root of the struggle for women's right to vote, the abolition of slavery, the pros and cons of the Vietnam War, The Great Depression? We cannot send our children out to demand respect for America and her institutions if we don't arm them with the truth.
|
