Which wouldn't be a problem in the history classroom, if it weren't for the fact that the time spent on it is time not spent teaching and learning about real history (including good and reliable sources). And it wouldn't be a problem in the world at large if it weren't for the fact that being able to evaluate sources and use them appropriately, and generally being able to tell reliable from unreliable information, isn't a skill important only for professional historians -- it's important for managers and workers (regardless of industry), voters, jurors, parents, and so on. It's important for many every day, real world decisions -- even, in some cases, life and death decisions.
Hey, I studied to be a historian too. No reasonable instructor expects students to come to a classroom as cultural blanks. But I really don't remember any of this type of "problem" from when I was a college student--other adult students thinking films (or novels) were reality.
Yes, analytical ability is important, and there are many people who don't use it much. It tends to be at odds with social conformity, which many people are more comfortable with. Analytical ability is also not encouraged in many situations where it should be--when they are selecting jurors for a trial of any importance, I've noticed they tend to weed out prospects with graduate degrees.
Still, most people do filter ads and entertainment through a certain degree of skeptism.
That such comments inevitably get not only strong reactions but also misinterpreted just demonstrates that the subject isn't all that obvious or a non-issue and that there is indeed a need for people to make such comments and observations.
I don't know, from your statements, whether you are professionally a teacher or not. If you are giving classes, lectures, workshops, etc., to which people have come voluntarily, then it is your job to educate them. If you have kids, it's your job to educate them.
If you're among other adults in a social situation, it is not your job to educate them. Among reenactors, saying (rightly or wrongly) that you know something they don't, or (rightly or wrongly) that you are more "accurate," is a common status game.
My saying that does not mean I have a "strong reaction" against statements that people should analyze data. I was taught to all my life, by my parents, so you're preaching to the choir there. Nor does it mean that I see films as anything but entertainment.
It means that in my own analysis of data, I've often observed that teaching as one-upmanship is a social pattern among certain groups of people.
While I think the whole world and every situation is a venue for educating yourself, I don't think it's a proper venue for educating everyone else. Give classes, lectures, workshops, to which people come voluntarily. Write books, articles, or websites they read voluntarily.
But if you really go around socially taking "every opportunity" to lecture everyone on all the "innacuracies" of every film they see, assuming they have no analytical ability and need you to save them from their illusions--you're just getting in their faces.
Fran Lavolta Press http://www.lavoltapress.com _______________________________________________ h-costume mailing list [email protected] http://mail.indra.com/mailman/listinfo/h-costume
