"Tonypandy" Nonsense

    Throughout the novel, The Daughter of Time, by Josephine Tey, there was a lot of "Tonypandy" nonsense. Tonypandy is a term to describe an event that has either been tampered with or blown out of proportion in a way that the event no longer holds truth to what actually happened. This could be because of political or religious reasons to make such an event hold more meaning to their cause. It was said in the book that Grant starts to believe that tonypandy exists everywhere--even in school books. I have to agree (and it's quite unsettling).

I'm actually obsessed with Tangled you guys soooo...

     This book's stance on history is very intriguing. I got a sense that the only way to really know what has happened in history is to not just look in writings that have been meant to be history, but to look at personal accounts and things that were not supposed to have any meaning, like a letter or something. Through these accounts, you can see the real truth. An example of this is when Grant and Carradine read a letter from Richard III about Jane Shore and the fact that she was to be married off to another guy. Instead of seeming angry about this, Richard seemed more sad than anything else. He willingly gave his girl away with no problem at all. I found that a little odd. So did Grant. If everyone depicted Richard to be an awful guy, I doubt that he would give up his girl without a fight. The gesture seems nice enough.

    Another thing I found interesting was the fact that there are so many ways history can get muddled. Not only can the writings of the time be biased or slightly untrue because of getting second hand information about a certain subject, but it can also be altered for different motives entirely. Especially people in power. Power is a good thing to have back in the day. You could change anything you want just because you can. Yes, there are some limitations, but I feel like if you have connections, like a king, you can get stuff done. When Henry VII became king, he went away with Titulus Regius (the thing that made Elizabeth and the Princes in the tower legitimate/illegitimate) and made it seem like it had never existed. What if he completely destroyed any notion that it existed? That there just happened to be no record of the original and lost forever? People in today's time would never actually know the full truth only because there would be no proof. I've come to believe that that could be the case in history since the beginning of recorded history.

            

   
   This book has changed how I view history for sure. It makes me feel like nothing can be completely true even when trying real hard to stay truthful. It reminds me of a book I read in high school. It was called, The Things They Carried, by Tim O'Brien. In it, there was a chapter named "How to Tell a True War Story" (or at least I think that's what it was called. Its been a long time so bear with me here). The chapter pretty much said that there was no way to tell a story that is completely true because there will always be a certain detail missed and/or sometimes even an exaggeration of the truth to make the story, or themselves, sound better. I guess you can call this... tonypandy nonsense :)