Would you
believe me if I said that this was the first book I’ve read from front to back
in my five semesters of college? Or would most of you consider that to be “tonypandy”?
Personally, I
really enjoyed reading Daughter of Time.
It was a break from the usual dry, boring textbook assignments that never have
any life. Josephine Tey was able to do accomplish a feat that I have never seen
done before and that was making a historical text come to life with a
compelling crime story. A rather tremendous feat when really thought about
because Tey also managed to pose a few interesting questions.
She made, I’d
say 90 percent of the world’s population question their definition of what
history is. In Daughter of Time,
Grant discovers that what is written in the textbooks regarding Richard III is
not actually the truth and therefore is not valid history.
History is an
accurate representation of occurrences from any point that has already
happened. There, my typing of the previous sentence is a form of history. Is it
important history? Not in the slightest but the event actually occurred. No one
framed or covered it up.
What Grant
realizes through his research is that a majority of what is written in the
textbooks ought to be classified as “tonypandy,” or myths regarding events that
actually happened in the past. In all honesty, the best way that I could
possible describe “tonypandy” is that it seems to me to be a form of telephone.
One person has
one recollection of what was said and tells someone, then that person modifies
it slightly so it fits his or her liking, and so forth. “Tonypandy” becomes
history when this game of telephone reaches the point where it has been passed
around so much that no one bothers to check anymore because lazy.
Tey made us all
challenge the beliefs we hold about history. I personally believe that history
is accurate most of the time but not to its fullest extent. Everyone knows that
those who were lucky enough to win are the ones who end up writing the history.
Unfortunately, people do not want to make themselves look bad so they leave out
a few minor (or let’s be honest, HUGE) details regarding the events, yet
normally it is pretty accurate.
In today’s age,
with the emergence of social media, it would appears to be much more difficult
to fake what happened since there are multiple witnesses to almost every event.
I agreed with you and came to the same conclusion myself. I also had a better understanding of it using the telephone game. I referenced that it would be more difficult to fake things as time and tech continue to develop.
ReplyDeleteI read it cover to cover too! Even towards the very end the characters were discovering new things, and in order for the whole mystery to unfold, you had to read the whole thing! It kept you engaged even though at some points there were endless details, and there seemed to be no end to their struggle of picking out fact from fiction. I agree that in the end, their main conclusion was that history was a victim of this telephone game.
ReplyDeleteI really liked how you compared history ("tonypandy") to a game of 'telephone', because that's quite realistic. One person says something, and throughout history and various recordings of an event, the truth is likely to get altered, exaggerated, etc. I also read this book cover to cover, and think that the author did a great job of keeping the reader interested while not being bored.
ReplyDeleteHaha that opening line was a good lead in. I think likening history to a game of telephone is an excellent point. I'm glad to see so many of us are on the same page in this class.
ReplyDelete