Whether dealing with bad textbooks, watching historical movies, or visiting
museum exhibits, students—and the rest of us—must learn how to deal with
sources. This process entails putting five questions to each work.^17
First, when and why was it written (or painted, etc.)? Locate the intended
audience in the social structure. Consider what the speaker was trying to
accomplish with them. This is part of what sociologists call the sociology of
knowledge approach. English professors call it contextualization: learning
about the social context of the text. As we have seen, historians call it
historiography: studying the writing of history. Historiography—the concept
and the term—can be taught to students as young as fourth grade, and it helps
make them critical readers and critical thinkers.^18
A second question, also part of historiography, is to ask whose viewpoint is
presented. Where is the speaker, writer, etc., located in the social structure?
What interests, material or ideological, does the statement serve? Whose
viewpoints are omitted? Students might then attempt to rewrite the story from a
different viewpoint, thus learning that history is inevitably partial.
Third, is the account believable? Does each acting group behave reasonably
—as we might, given the same situation and socialization? This approach also
requires examining the work for internal contradictions. Does it cohere? Do
some of its assertions contradict others? If textbooks emphasize the United
States as a generally helpful presence in Latin America, for example, how do
they explain anti-Yankee sentiment in the region?
Fourth, is the account backed up by other sources? Or do other authors
contradict it? This question sends us to the secondary historical and social
science literature. Even a cursory encounter with research on social class in
other countries, for instance, is enough to refute the glowing textbook accounts
of America as a land of unparalleled opportunity.
Finally, after reading the words or seeing the image, how is one supposed to
feel about the America that has been presented? This analysis also includes
examining the authors’ choice of words and images. “Most of the words we use
in history and everyday speech are like mental depth charges,” James Axtell
has written. “As they descend [through our consciousness] and detonate, their
resonant power is unleashed, showering our understanding with fragments of
accumulated meaning and association.”^19
Readers who keep these five questions in mind will have learned how to
learn history.
Teachers and students are not the only fulcrums for change. New factors