Rating: 
Summary: For those who enjoy challenging their own ideas: READ!!
Review: Loewen's book is important for one reason: it forces the reader to question what they've been told is true, or what they've been told to believe. People can dismiss his examples as political correctness, or as one-sided, but that's in essence the point: every history you will ever read is told through a particular filter or point of view. This point of view shapes (or distorts)the historical narrative in different ways, some of them deliberately misleading. Loewen argues against merely accepting the dominant point of view, i.e. throwing off the notion that only the victors can write history. Beyond that, there is much that he points out about our nation's historical sites that are inarguably factually inaccurate. Anyone from any idealogical background should be eager to have all history told with the truth in mind, although versions of this "truth" may always differ. Loewen was asked in an interview if this approach might lead to an "all history is relative" attitude, but he disagreed: "No, to encourage differences of opinion is not to say that all opinions are equally appropriate. There is a reason that teachers are at the head of the class. And there is such a thing as truth. You can only get there, though, by scrutinizing different perspectives and encouraging debate." This book certainly encourages a critical reading of history, and for that alone is a valuable contribution to historical scholarship. The reader should be upset by the time they finish this book, and then they should examine exactly why that's so. Is it because you think Loewen's done a hatchet job on American history? Or is it that you can't believe what's been passed off to you as history? Either way, an America in which history is told from different points of view and vigorously argued is a stronger America than one in which we passively accept a particular point of view, or remain ignorant as to who's doing the telling.
Rating: 
Summary: Pure Controversy
Review: The reviews this book has already drawn demonstrate author James W. Loewen's principal assertion in this and other books: that history is essentially controversial. If you approach the book with the understanding that it's intended to stir up some brouhaha and ruffle some feathers, you'll do just fine.Unfortunately, Loewen's declarative style and his assertions treated as fact make it hard to keep this in mind. Some of the statements he makes are easily agreeable. When I lived in Hawaii, I was struck by how Caucasian the famous statues of King Kamehameha I looked, and there's no surprise when Loewen criticizes them for not looking Polynesian enough. Other statements, like his broad condemnation of memorials to the Confederate dead, are going to bring some heated feelings to the fore. It is in racial issues that Loewen excels, and he'll be more than happy to hold forth at length as to why white people are sinners and minorities are sanctified. This stock liberal pose is unlikely to make any converts. This is not to say any of his assertions are wrong, only that the author thinks he's being controversial, when he's actually parroting established opinions. Probably the only factual failing Loewen makes is in asserting that historical markers should encompass more of the controversial nature of history. This is unlikely to ever happen, as historical markers are put up primarily for the benefit of road-tripping middle-class families and local boosterism groups. They're usually quite small, and couldn't possibly contain all the information with which Loewen would like to imbue them. The people who put them up are consistently of the opinion that, if people want multiple views of history, they can read books. (Ha, ha.) Loewen's goals are noble and admirable, but unlikely to ever be realized. One other glaring problem presents itself. At the end of every mini-essay in the book, Loewen cites his source material. In this and his other books, he has reviled the use of secondary sources in writing history books, yet his own cited sources are often secondary materials, as though he is tacitly acknowledging the cumbersome nature of double-checking primary sources. A little consistency on this issue would strengthen the weight of the author's argument. In general, this book is good, if you keep its intended purpose in mind. If Loewen's style distracts you from the essential controversy of his opinions, you'll either wind up hating the book abjectly, or mimicking his opinions as blindly as other people mimic the mainstream opinion. Let him tick you off, rile you up, get your blood flowing. Then check his source material and make up your own mind. Only then will you be fulfilling the point of this volume.
Rating:
Summary: Pure Controversy
Review: The reviews this book has already drawn demonstrate author James W. Loewen's principal assertion in this and other books: that history is essentially controversial. If you approach the book with the understanding that it's intended to stir up some brouhaha and ruffle some feathers, you'll do just fine. Unfortunately, Loewen's declarative style and his assertions treated as fact make it hard to keep this in mind. Some of the statements he makes are easily agreeable. When I lived in Hawaii, I was struck by how Caucasian the famous statues of King Kamehameha I looked, and there's no surprise when Loewen criticizes them for not looking Polynesian enough. Other statements, like his broad condemnation of memorials to the Confederate dead, are going to bring some heated feelings to the fore. It is in racial issues that Loewen excels, and he'll be more than happy to hold forth at length as to why white people are sinners and minorities are sanctified. This stock liberal pose is unlikely to make any converts. This is not to say any of his assertions are wrong, only that the author thinks he's being controversial, when he's actually parroting established opinions. Probably the only factual failing Loewen makes is in asserting that historical markers should encompass more of the controversial nature of history. This is unlikely to ever happen, as historical markers are put up primarily for the benefit of road-tripping middle-class families and local boosterism groups. They're usually quite small, and couldn't possibly contain all the information with which Loewen would like to imbue them. The people who put them up are consistently of the opinion that, if people want multiple views of history, they can read books. (Ha, ha.) Loewen's goals are noble and admirable, but unlikely to ever be realized. One other glaring problem presents itself. At the end of every mini-essay in the book, Loewen cites his source material. In this and his other books, he has reviled the use of secondary sources in writing history books, yet his own cited sources are often secondary materials, as though he is tacitly acknowledging the cumbersome nature of double-checking primary sources. A little consistency on this issue would strengthen the weight of the author's argument. In general, this book is good, if you keep its intended purpose in mind. If Loewen's style distracts you from the essential controversy of his opinions, you'll either wind up hating the book abjectly, or mimicking his opinions as blindly as other people mimic the mainstream opinion. Let him tick you off, rile you up, get your blood flowing. Then check his source material and make up your own mind. Only then will you be fulfilling the point of this volume.
Rating: 
Summary: Expecting something...different
Review: The subject of history and its interpretation has become the topic of widespread debate due to its dual nature: Real people and events and their interpretation. The latter is the real controversy in history. Columbus is not admired (or hated) due to who he was or even what he did but over the consequences of his actions - discovery of a New World or destroyer of an old one. History has always been affected by politics and prejudice but ideology has become paramount lately. Perhaps the most infuriating development is the absurd tendency to view earlier times and individuals through a modern, politically correct prism. This book reminds me of NPR in its relentlessly ideological approach to all issues...every event is politicized. Ideology is unceasing, benefits of the doubt are never extended, traditional ways are overlooked and after wading through harangues and scoldings in what is essentially an angry indictment of this nation one wonders why we have not had continual rebellions. Like NPR, he LOVES to bash the South. NPR rails against (take your pick) racism, poverty, illiteracy and/or evangelicalism. Loewen evokes memories of the Confederacy and slavery almost as a mantra. Fanciful and unrealistic Civil War memorials exist in many place but is that immoral? Professional nincompoops wanted to erect a politically correct monument to 911 (the raising of the flag) which would have been historically inaccurate but not immoral. The author has a tendency to overemphasize certain events just to make his point - akin to Chomsky's connecting random events to prove his dialectic. Some interesting points are made but ALWAYS through this contemporary prism of judgement. Were statues and/or painting skewed to express the view of the artist? Of course they were because that is a human tendency. Jesus is portrayed as a long-haired European man, Washington, in the enormous status in the Museum of American History has become a Roman emperor because the sculptor admired the classic period. Even if some events were misinterpreted is that an indictment? No matter how one approaches the history of our country, there is one inescapable fact: To millions around the world, this land with all its inconsistencies, prejudices and faults has been perceived as heaven on earth since its inception. And even in the worst moments, there has never been even a trickle - much less an exodus - of citizens desiring life in another nation.
Rating:
Summary: Outstanding scholarship
Review: This was an AMAZING book. It gives markers and monuments real faces: that is, the faces of the men, women, and organizations who organize and fund said sites and markers to make sure their version of "history" remains on the landscape. Especially telling are the voluminous markers to the Confederacy, continually romanticizing and ultimately misrepresenting its true origin and purpose, as well as those monuments to whites' "discovery" and "civilization" of the "new" world at the expense and near extermination of the native american indian. If this book doesn't debunk or expose at least three erroneous ideas about history you've always held as truth, then you're probably a history professor, and a damn good one. Loewen points out that the past is always more complex than is often represented. As he illustrates, the telling of history is often done by the powerful, the wealthy, the victorious. Loewen argues that to know where we're headed, we need a clear and un-edited understanding of our past. It is this examination of the past, he argues, that our democracy must be able to withstand, and which will ultimately make it stronger. A thought-provoking and immensely entertaining book.
Rating:
Summary: An enjoyable journey across the continent
Review: What happened in the past is the past and what we say about it is history, James W. Loewen says as he opens Lies Across America (21). In the course of 95 vignettes Loewen demonstrates that much of the time history, as it is presented to the public through historic sites across the country, takes the form of non-controversial hogwash. Loewen points out that historic site visitors should realize that each location tells two stories: the story of the event or person it is commemorating and the story of its erection or preservation. The former is the truth and the latter is what those who erected or preserved the monument want the general public to think is the truth. Loewen argues many erectors suffer from the "heritage syndrome," the impulse to only remember what is attractive or flattering and ignore all the rest (47).
Through an often humorous and sometimes sarcastic tone Lies Across America demonstrates that European-Americans decidedly feel that nothing important happened until they arrived on the scene and after that what they did was all that mattered. The title of one entry says it all: "Don't `Discover' `Til You See The Eyes of The Whites" (74). Time and time again Loewen illustrates how many historic sites and place names slight Native Americans. Many tribes are known by negative names - names their enemies gave to them - and some monument monikers stigmatize Indian religion and culture, such as Devil's Tower in Wyoming, whose name blasphemes local Indians because to them it is a holy site (133). Across the landscape, Native Americans do not get the credit they deserve, such as two historical markers in California that omit the Indians' contribution in building Sutter's fort and some of the Catholic Church's missions.
Loewen contends that some historical markers present invented history, while others don't present enough. A monument in Almo, Idaho memorializes a massacre that never took place (89-93). Visitors at the preserved homes of Helen Keller and 15th president James Buchanan see a wonderful array of period furniture and architecture but learn little of the famous people who lived there. Nothing is spoken of Keller's radicalism at her home and at the former Buchanan residence visitors do not hear about the former president's political views and homosexuality (367-370).
Lies Across America teaches Americans to be highly critical of how history is portrayed across the landscape. It teaches visitors to take what is presented in every historic site at face value and not assume the monument depicts the whole truth. In the second appendix, Loewen includes questions every visitor should ask in order to get the real story of each monument or marker, and any visitor would benefit from asking the questions and uncovering their answers.
The book's one weakness is organization. Each entry is arranged geographically, when it would be a smoother read if done topically. Organizing entries together by topic would avoid disjunction. However, the volume is highly readable and should be enjoyable to anyone interested in history, both academic and laymen. Every entry grabs readers' attention no matter if they have prior interest or knowledge in the subject presented. Its content generates a whole host of trivia questions and answers while also discussing the more important themes of American history - racism, sexism, slavery, and exploitation.
|
