As a history and English double major, I simply could not stop myself from discussing the Theory Toolbox chapter “History.” Although I recognize that the two disciplines view literature through different lenses, I tend to combine the two frames of reference somewhat. However, in the case of history being written by the victors, while “literature tends to side with the vanquished and powerless,” I must agree with Giroux and Nealon’s analysis and deconstruction, and would like to explore it further (117). The history of the victors is written by victors, but the “powerless” have their own histories and narratives, and they are just as valuable; they are simply not as well known.
For instance, consider the decolonization of Africa. In my high school classes, we skimmed this period, treating Africa almost as one large country, while focusing on how the European colonizers reacted and, ultimately, graciously granted the colonies their freedom. The version of history that we were taught in those classes was filtered the view of the “victors” – or at least those whom we were supposed to see as more relevant to the class. However, the decolonization process was by no means uniform, either by mother country or colony. Some colonies, such as Mali, underwent a relatively peaceful transition process (at least at first), while others fought desperately to break the chains of their colonial overlords, the most extreme example being Algeria’s bitter battle for independence. And yet, in most classes, we tend to gloss over this rich and varied history in favor of the “mainstream” history.
I would argue that the true distinction between the narrative of the victors and the narrative of the vanquished is what determined to be commonly-acknowledged, commonly-taught history, and the more “obscure” history. In order to bridge the gap, it is necessary to bring together both narratives to present a more accurate and inclusive view.
I’m very interested in learning more about obscure history too. It saddened me when I learned in high school that many Native American cultures were wiped out by European colonists. Being a large fan of fantasy and mythology, I would have loved to know what great oral tales were told in those tribes about daily life or the world’s creation. Native Americans are generally known for respecting the earth and taking care of it, and believing that it takes care of them in return. I wish that belief was more prominent in the present. With this winter being much warmer than those in the pasts, I find it hard to believe that global warming doesn’t exist. I am frightened that we will ruin the world’s climate within the next few years, possibly erasing the winter season completely. I believe that if we would take care of the earth in ways similar to the Native Americans, we can truly preserve our planet.
I think the distinction between high-school history and more mature historical studies, which both Hannah and N&G discuss is interesting: the more reductive and streamlined a history, the more likely it is to omit or ignore other views and other complexities. In that way, the very structure of high school education, which emphasizes broad coverage over detailed knowledge, sustains certain cultural ideologies about the western world. In addition to the history of victors vs. vanquished, I have been interested in the recent trend of history told from the point of view of an object, entity, or commodity: corn, coffee, the potato, rain, wind, light, etc. Any thoughts on what that perspective offers?