LOW LEVELS
I am constantly being amazed by the appalling ignorance so many people - full-fledged, native-born citizens - display concerning the history of our relatively young nation and its varied cultural heritage. I am even more disturbed when I see and hear a newcomer hold forth on the subject with an amazing degree of assurance.
We have been remiss in our history studies and continue to be so.
I do not limit my criticism to our young people, either. Thanks largely to our diverse communication systems, our youth have done very well in acquiring a basic knowledge - if faulty, at times, view of our nation - how it began, we all came from, how we go here and what we have done since we arrived. It is not only our educational systems which seem to be at fault, either. Do you think your local church instructs young members concerning church history, how we differ in interpretations of major and minor beliefs? Or, are we forever seeking new ways of “dumbing down” such instructions - both temporal and theological - to avoid causing any waves of controversy or of making those we already have, and insist on retaining, more obvious.
There is a marked deficiency among just about all age levels, both sexes, and among those of all religious groups. It remains to be seem how this is going to influence our future, but the chance of it making the years ahead better slight.
I have not objections to Walt Disney's fine work in animated films, or with those highly successful Golden Books which have been such a pleasure to millions of children but when those who product such materials find they are marketing mainly to adult users we had best take pause for some second thoughts.
If your sole, or preferred, source of information for the facts which make up the story of “Pocahontas” is that set forth, however so well, by Disney, you do not have a definitive knowledge of the Indian maiden who played a role in our early history. The animate film strays far, far from facts as well as common sense, for that matter, and while it is entertaining and serves a worthy purpose with young children, it is not intended to be the criteria on which adults are to judge the affect a teen-aged Indian girl may have had on and somewhat aging John Smith and the colonists of struggling Jamestown in Virginia of 1607.
Our television shows rarely give a true view of historical incidents. Of necessity, they must be hyped a bit here and there with those elements which draw the average small screen fan's attention.
The big screens of today - I suppose we have best call them the multi-screens of today - seldom do history well. They, too, must bow to conventions which afford them a livelihood and there is nothing wrong with that, either. Again, the blame - if that is what we are seeking - seems to be more personal. We cannot continue to be critical of the media other, at the same time, expect it to be an effortless entre for us into all that is learned, proper, dignified and worthwhile. That has never been the main media function.
The latest culprit is, of course, the computer and the associated Internet. The jury is still out - 'way out – on that one and it appears it may be sequestered for some time.
That seems to leave our educational systems as the whipping boy, doesn't it?
But, don't latch the corral gates too soon, however. Other horses remain to be broken.
Once more, “self” enters into the arena. In one way or another our educational systems are what we, ourselves, have made them or allowed them to become.
What will each of us do about it? A. L..M. August 23, 2003 [c645wds]
