Alan Grant's view on history - by Alex Graham
Alan Grant prides himself on his canny ability to decipher faces and the actions attributed to those faces. I believe that according to this book, history is simply another word for the past. When he is in bed, Grant is given many pieces of history (or in other words, many pieces of the past) to keep him entertained. The picture of Richard III that he receives piques his interest and proposes a challenge for his facial deciphering abilities.
I loved how this book wasn't afraid to go against what everyone had thought previously and question what we think we know. It happens all the time in history; ignorant people who think they know what happened write history and then people end up believing their lies.
This book challenged me to really think into every historical document that I read. It challenged me to think about both sides of every story and what the justification could've been for heinous acts throughout history. Take Adolf Hitler, for example. I wasn't alive during his lifetime or WWII, so all I can do is believe what history told me about his life. Although it is not likely, wouldn't it be possible for everyone to have lied to me about the life of Hitler and for him to actually been a good person? The same goes for Richard III; History tells us that he was a murderer, but couldn't he have been a decent guy after all?
The question that I leave with after reading this book is that if tonypandy happened to the history of someone, who would be more ignorant: the person who conjured the false stories and wrote them down as history? or the reader for not doubting what history tells them?
Your last question really made me think. Who really is more ignorant? When I thought about it, it seems pretty equal. Although the person recording history should consider their facts, I think it is in our right to question what has been written. I have never thought to question textbooks, but after this book I might have to reconsider.
ReplyDeleteComing from a household where both my father and brother are both history majors makes me think about all the historical facts and details that I have heard. After reading this book I honestly wonder know what has happen on the other side of history. You made a really good point about Hitler we do not know how he was, or why he acted that certain way. We only know the facts that were told to us similar to the facts that were told to us about Richard.
ReplyDeleteI like how you really focus on misconceptions and even go as far as to bring up the character of Hitler and how we could have it completely wrong. This might be extreme because there seems to be strong evidence that Hitler played a huge role in the Holocaust, but your point really comes across. Who is more at fault for the these misconceptions?? I'd say it's almost human nature to spice up the telling of event or to even flat out lie about them. We are all at fault to some extent, but if we really want the facts instead of believing these embellished stories of history, then we need to remember to question and look into everything.
ReplyDelete