Rating: 
Summary: Loewen is informative, yet wordy
Review: I was recently assigned Loewen's "Lies My Teacher Told Me" for an introductory history course. The first few chapters were extremely interesting. They caught my attention and kept me reading because I was surprised at the number of fallacies high school students are being told in social studies classes across the nation. This book HAS given me a new approach to the study and interpretation of history, and I'm thankful for that. The only problem I had with the book is that Loewen tended to get rather wordy at times. Hero making was a good way to start off the book, since it hit you right on with what you thought about your favorite historical figures and the truth about them. Columbus and Thanksgiving were eye-openers, and at times page turners. The rest of the book remained highly informative as well, but it would take Loewen 30 pages to say what he could say in perhaps 10. I felt myself going through deja-vous throughout the entire book. But I guess he can make more money from a book than a journal. Overall, I thought the book was extremely appropriate for an introductory history course, mostly because it isn't a standard textbook and it opens your mind to new ways of thinking. And I guess Loewen doesn't call himself a great writer, but a researcher trying to give Americans facts to help them better understand their country. I would recommend it to anyone fed up with his or her history experience.
Rating: 
Summary: Recommended for those who question authority.
Review: When I was in school, I never thought to question the contents of my textbooks or the lectures of my teachers. I had not learned skepticism or how to question the assumed authority of the written word. I didn't understand what racism was (nobody talked about it then) let alone that many of the early Americans were rampant racists. With the reading of The Crucible in high school I began to understand the power the written word can take as a social commentary and how the truth can be distorted into something completely unrecognizable. By the time I was in college I learned not to believe everything I read, and that history is not written in stone. There are unanswered questions, there are varying accounts, there are downright discrepancies. This book has been extremely informative, in giving the part of American history that the text books leave out. It may not be necessary to have complete disclosure in that 4th grade history text, but it could add some of the other (often dark) facets to the personalities of our 'American heroes'. Very informative and intriguing, I recommend to history buffs and those who question authority alike.
Rating: 
Summary: Something has gone very wrong....
Review: This book, which (ironically?) should be required reading in U.S. schools, asks - and answers - some important questions. For instance, "why is history taught like this"? why is history such an unpopular subject?, and "what is the result of teaching history like this"? James Loewen, a professor at the University of Vermont, spent 11 years researching and writing a book which attempts to answer these and other questions. And although Loewen certainly has a specific political perspective (left-of-center), it really doesn't matter much as far as the book is concerned. Someone with a right-of-center political ideology theoretically could have written a book like this, because the bottom line is that the way American history is "taught" now shortchanges EVERYONE - right/left, white/black, man/woman, majority/minority, etc.Lowen's overall conclusion regarding the teaching of American history in our schools is that "something has gone very wrong." The biggest problems, in his opinion: "the books are boring...every problem has already been solved or is about to be", textbooks "exclude conflict or real suspense", textbooks "almost never use the present to illuminate the past", they "keep students in the dark about the nature of history" (which is not always sweetness and light, even in America, believe it or not!), and they always try to paint America - especially white, male, European, upper class, Christian America -- in the best possible light, even when it contradicts the facts. But no matter what your ethnicity or political point of view, you should be opposed to the way history is taught in schools, because it makes a mockery of American history (and ultimately America itself), which is a fascinating history (and country) - in all its incarnations (good, bad, amoral, etc.). Taught in a moronic, boring, rote-memorizing way, however, American history is sure to turn off just about anyone with a brain. And that's pretty pitiful when you consider the amazing dramas that American history contains - it takes some real effort to make THAT boring! But U.S. history textbooks manage it, somehow... The result of all this? Unlike just about any other subject, studying history the way it is taught in our schools "actually makes students stupid," according to Lowen, and they get stupider the more they study it! Students (and future voters) are thus "hamstrung in their efforts to analyze controversial issues in our society." Besides making people stupid and bored, the way history is taught in America today also leads to all kinds of distorted views (to the extent that students pay any attention) of the past, and ultimately the present (and even the future). This problem is especially bad for non-European minority students, especially if their group happened to be one of the "losers" historically. For those students, "American" history is hardly about them or their ancestors at all, which of course implies that their history/ancestors/culture are not worth writing about. (Sort of like when I was a kid and thought that all the news was in the newspaper; if it wasn't in the newspaper it must not be important!). To the extent that Native American history is covered at all, for instance, it almost totally glosses over some pertinent facts, like for starters that Christopher Colombus and the majority of European "explorers" consciously set out to enslave, convert, oppress, torture, and even exterminate the natives, mainly in the name of profit maximization. This is not an issue of being "PC", or "psychotherapy for minorities" as the Rush Limbaugh "dittoheads" would undoubtedly argue, but of depicting history, warts and all, ACCURATELY. As it is now, American history can be thought of as little more than "psychotherapy for whites". Do we really need THAT? Are we saying that European Americans can't handle the truth? Remember, there's both glory and ignomy in everyone's history. We're all human, after all. Maybe that's what bothers the right wingers most of all - the thought that they and their ancestors are in the same boat as everyone else, and that they are not inherently special or better than anyone else. But isn't that what America's supposed to be about? Equality of opportunity? All men are CREATED EQUAL? Anyway, the bottom line question here is: what constitutes American patriotism? If you think it should be a blind, unthinking belief in America's goodness and greatness, then don't read this book...it will just make you angry! If you think, though, that what makes America a great country is diversity (of thought, mainly), the liberty to draw your own conclusions and hold whatever beliefs you care to hold, and the right to argue whatever side you're on passionately in a great democracy, then this is the book for you. Enjoy!
Rating:
Summary: Required reading
Review: [I wish there was a search engine here so that I could find out if which of those 120 reviews was written by a non-American. I'd like to hear what my own compatriots thought.] I found "Lies" both enjoyable and informative. I have read a few American history books and seen a few historic sites and a lot of documentaries on U.S. television networks and most seemed very puffed up about how a great Republic of heroes marched onward to a glorious destiny. [I exaggerate but only a little] It was refreshing to read simular criticism from an American - repeat American - history professor. Perhaps Prof. Loewen exaggerated too, to prove his argument that there is neither enough time nor less haliographic textbooks in the U.S. high school American history curricula. If they were more controversial and more time was alloted for discussion [of attitudes concerning the immigration of the Irish, Chinese and other non-English races at various times in the 19th and early 20th centuries for example], students could compare and contrast, question, learn the skills of becoming informed and participatory citizens. The present method is a quick spoonfeeding of what they are 'supposed to know', no questioning, no discussion, which leaves the citizen with historical indigestion of half taught half remembered 'facts' is how I understand his argument. But he is right that this method leaves too many gaps that distorts "what happened" into fantasy, not history. I never knew in school what an activist Helen Keller was [she was only the 'good little deaf girl' a sort Shirley Temple played in the movies] or that the "Civil War" North was not 100 % abolutionist and that there were draft riots and race riots in New York City. To say that your Founding Fathers were not equal to Greek gods; that the colonists had to decide "Isn't this treason and what is it worth to me?" before they fought for Washington or King George or stayed home. It floored me. It's so radical. Much of his argument reminded me how alike is the method history is taught here in Canada. Loewen writes that most Americans have not read about the War of 1812 from the Canadian perspective. I'm sure he's right; but I've not read about that war from the American perspective. American textbooks call those who did not fight for Washington 'Tories' ['Tory' = 'Traitor']. My textbooks call them 'Loyalists' and their decendants are so proud of the name. We don't trumpet our 'heroes'; but we don't read in our schoolbooks about the shady deal our founding fathers tried to put through regarding the building of the Canadian Pacific Railroad. Pity. I would've gained some knowledge how "the real world" works. All in all, I think it should be required reading on your side of the border, whatever your 'wing' is, and a Canadian version of the same should be written for my side of the border. Then, lets trade books about 1812, shall we?
Rating:
Summary: A funny, elegant kick in the seat of the pants
Review: James Loewen's written two similar books on general American History. Both of them contrast bland myth-historical blather -- of high school textbooks here, and of official monuments and markers in his latest -- with real, living, primary source history. These books are just a kick; they make a serious argument about the vitality of real history (as opposed to textbook pablum) into a really good read. Loewen's approach is very readable and natural. In Lies My Teacher Told Me, he starts by looking at several high school textbooks and comparing their treatments of various historical subjects. For example, he takes a look at what each book says about the Lincoln Douglas debates. He goes into some simple comparisons of the books -- a few of them, for example, mention Douglas's manner of speaking and clothes. Then, with relish, he sinks his teeth in and contrasts the books with the story the primary sources tell. Hey -- NONE of these books describes what the debates were about... Why are they devoting time to Douglas's suit and not to his moral justification of slavery? Why don't they even connect these debates to the civil war? I haven't read all the reviews on Amazon, but I'm going to guess that Loewen gets an angry reaction from certain readers. Don't assume this author is "leftist" just because, say, white supremacists get rattled reading him. Woodrow Wilson, a president revered by many modern Democrat sorts as a far-sighted, generally liberal figure brought down by a misguided political feud with Henry Cabot Lodge, gets absolutely skewered in this book. Loewen takes a scathing look at Wilson's racism -- and touches on several implications of that racism for our more recent history. This book is about how textbook authors dole out sanitized, "safe" history that fails to give American children anything real to make judgments by -- it is NOT about deflating any particular group's mythology. Forget all that, though, and it's still fun. Both Lies My Teacher Told Me and Lies Across America are really engaging books. The simple approach -- Look at what these bland textbooks say next to the lively real history -- just works. Loewen's got a lively voice and a sharp sense of irony. This book will give you many wry smiles, it'll stir you up, it'll make you sad sometimes, and it'll make you laugh out loud. If you're choosing between this one and Lies Across America, I'd say this is less browsable and slightly more serious in tone. (Lies Across America has separate short chapters, one for each historical monument or marker, and you can pick it up pretty much anywhere.) Don't worry, though -- you'll end up getting them both anyway.
Rating: 
Summary: good ideas, but on and on, and on...
Review: I'll be brief. This book has many good points and it does cast a bright light on many issues that have been misrepresented. Unfortunately, the author continues with his tirades to the point of nauseating the reader. Many of the historical issues on which the author spends considerable amounts of ink are nearly obvious. He doesn't need to continue for pages and pages on end; where the author discusses Columbus for 30 pages, he could as easily devote 5-10 pages on the subject. Most people understand racial crimes committed by early colonists; most people are familiar already with Columbus's horrific acts against the natives; most people realize that the native Americans were (and are) a diverse ethnic group that shouldn't be generalized. His elementary points and nit picking about the use of terms such as "settle" are trite and woefully repetitive; the book is extremely drawn out. I don't see much "liberal BIAS" in the book, but Loewen IS without question a diehard liberal and sometimes it feels as if he is preaching to the reader to the point of belligerence. Again, it's a good thing that people understand that flaws exist in the way American History is taught, and so the purpose of this book is a noble one. But for all its nobility, "Lies my Teacher Told me" is the epitome of redundancy!
Rating:
Summary: So very, very, true.
Review: As a soon to be ninth grader, I know all too well that what mister Loewen writes about is true. At my school we learned American history in Middle School, and I'm about to go into World History. So, I've had all the limited exposure to American History that I'm gonna get. Everything he says about the fluff added to some really nasty things in a American history have come right out of the textbooks I've been studying. And, to anyone kid in the same position, I wouldn't talk back about things held dear such as C. Columbus. The teachers seem to really take offense when you say that what they are teaching is wrong. Nearly everything in this book is truthful.
Rating:
Summary: Very good read
Review: I enjoyed this book thoroughly. It goes a long way toward dispelling many of the myths and falsehoods that are perpetuated in high school American History textbooks. One of the things it does best is generate an interest in further research and discussion. As one can tell from the differing viewpoints and arguments made in previous reviews, history is not a cut and dried subject with a bunch of unassailable facts. It is a lively subject full of controversy and ripe for discussion. That is one of the main problems that the author points out in textbooks. Whether you agree with his viewpoint or believe him to have a liberal bias, the book accomplishes its goal of bringing history to life for many people who are not aware of its richness. For this reason alone, I feel the book is well worth the price. Definitely recommended reading for anyone interested in history.
Rating:
Summary: The Three Stars Have It
Review: While this book does bring up some valid points there is absolutely no doubt that the author's extreme left-wing bias gets in the way. However Loewen does footnote all his assertions so his sources can be checked in the back. I found this very useful in discerning the truth from the propaganda. Read the five and one star reviews with a grain of salt, anyone who said this book was dead on is way to set in there liberal ways. On the other hand those who say the book didn't even raise one valid point are leaning hard in the other direction. Definitely get this one at the library or borrow it from a friend.
Rating:
Summary: Biased and unfair readings of History!
Review: James W. Loewen on the surface appears innocent in critiquing American history. However, he himself is teaching "Lies" of his own, and deserves historical criticism. First of all, when he talks about the atrocities in Vietnam he overlooks the fact that the Vietcong and communists have committed crimes on much bigger scale than Americans did. It is even ironic how he doesn't mention the fact that the Americans held their own G.I's responsible---something totally unknown amongst communist regimes. Also, his indictments of Columbus is absurd. First of all, if De Las Casas only wintessed latter times, then his portrayal of Columbus is suspect. After all, there are no first hand evidence supporting the notion of "genocide".If anything, many Spaniards sought good relations with the Natives (as a general rule). Secondly,if there are more Indians today than several years ago, then "genocide" is unthinkable. And compared to most slave traders, Columbus was mild as well as a leightweight. Finally, the Tainos were not as innocent as some liberals such as this author would have you believe. They a matter of factly, like their Carib neighbors, were notorious for pagan rituals, which terrified Columbus and his men. So, to say that the War with the Arawaks was merely putting down a rebellion is a bit of an overstatement on Loewen's part. It was both the Conquistadores as well as the Indians' actions that lead to war in Hispaniola. He also mentions the fact that disease killed native tribes during the pilgrim era,reducing down the number of Indian warriors. But, isn't that precisely the point? There you go. If disease really made a big toll, then obviously "genocide" is out of the question. It was unintentionally spread since 85% of these early victims never encountered a white man. Furthermore, the Natives, such as the pequots, launched unprovoked masculine attacks against other Indians as well as whites (although there were a few exceptions where they were actually retaliating). So, there was some rational behind the pequot war (self-defense perhaps) although both Cultures, puritans and pequots alike, both showed feelings of hostility and bigotry. I recommend this book since it does a thorough job of introducing people to a variety of issues. But why not suggest books defending the right wing point of view? A good beginning place is Robert Royal's "1492 And All That" as well as his booklet "Columbus On Trial". Also, Steve Wilkins has written excellent stuff on American history. All in all, this book is very one sided but atleast it spells out an overview of the various historical controversies.
|
