This essay addresses the following scenario: You are a staffer for NCHE (National Council on History Education). The Board of Trustees has directed NCHE staff to submit proposals for books that could provide the basis for a national conversation on American history. Preliminary discussions have narrowed the choices down to either Howard Zinn’s "A People's History of the United States" or Paul Johnson’s "A History of the American People". The NCHE Board wants a recommendation from you. Your memo should summarize the different “stories” told by each historian, comparing and contrasting them, and make a case for why you think one book would be a better choice than the other.
Table of Contents
1. Howard Zinn or Paul Johnson: Which Author´s Story Makes Better Sense of the History of the United States?
Objectives and Themes
The document serves as a formal recommendation by the National Council on History Education (NCHE) regarding the selection of a definitive history book to address the decline in historical knowledge among young Americans. The primary objective is to evaluate and contrast Howard Zinn’s "A People’s History of the United States" and Paul Johnson’s "A History of the American People" to determine which work provides a more accurate, balanced, and constructive perspective on United States history.
- Comparison of ideological perspectives: Neo-Marxist vs. Conservative interpretations of American history.
- Critique of Zinn’s "people vs. elites" narrative and its perceived societal divisiveness.
- Evaluation of Johnson’s "high ideals, mixed results" framework.
- Methodological assessment regarding the quality and reliability of historical evidence.
- The role of historical narrative in fostering national identity and optimism.
Excerpt from the Book
Howard Zinn or Paul Johnson: Which Author´s Story Makes Better Sense of the History of the United States?
First, Zinn fails at living up to the title of his book, as he is not able to present a real “people´s history”. His book is not describing the history of the American people, not even of the majority of the people, but of the minority of the people. Zinn´s book reads like a sequence of rebellions of different social groups/minorities, what makes A People´s History of the United States not only very incomplete but also irksome to read.
One might argue in defense of Zinn that it is not his intention to cover the history of the whole American people, as he states in his book: “As for the subtitle of this book, it is not quite accurate; a ‘people´s history’ promises more than any one person can fulfill, and it is the most difficult kind of history to recapture. I call it that anyway because, with all its limitations, it is a history disrespectful of governments and respectful of people´s movements of resistance” (631). However, are the men and women who are part of the government not also part of the American people? And does the opinion and fate of the masses not also deserve to be covered by a history of the United States? By only portraying the history of resistant/rebellious minorities, Zinn sometimes makes it look like these minority groups were actually the majority, and they were only unable to achieve change because of the oppressive elites.
Summary of Chapters
Howard Zinn or Paul Johnson: Which Author´s Story Makes Better Sense of the History of the United States?: This section introduces the conflict between two historical interpretations, evaluating Zinn’s focus on resistance and Johnson’s focus on the American experiment, ultimately concluding that Johnson’s work is more suitable for educational use.
Keywords
American History, Howard Zinn, Paul Johnson, Historiography, NCHE, Neo-Marxism, Conservative Ideology, Historical Education, People vs. Elites, High Ideals, National Identity, Historical Evidence, American History Month, Social Movements, Political Narrative.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the core issue addressed in this document?
The document addresses the decline in historical knowledge among young Americans and the subsequent challenge of selecting a suitable history textbook to be used in educational readings.
What are the primary thematic areas covered?
The analysis focuses on historiography, political ideology, the reliability of historical evidence, and the impact of different historical narratives on societal unity and patriotism.
What is the primary goal of the author's argument?
The goal is to justify the NCHE's recommendation of Paul Johnson’s "A History of the American People" over Howard Zinn’s "A People’s History of the United States" for the American History Month.
Which methodology is employed in this evaluation?
The author uses a comparative analysis of the authors' ideological backgrounds, the structure of their narratives, the quality of their source materials, and the overall message conveyed by their respective books.
What is discussed in the main body of the text?
The main body examines Zinn's "people vs. elites" framework, his reliance on potentially biased sources, and contrasts this with Johnson's "high ideals, mixed results" approach, which is deemed more comprehensive and credible.
Which keywords best characterize this work?
Key terms include American History, Historiography, Neo-Marxism, Conservative Ideology, Historical Evidence, and National Identity.
Why does the author argue that Zinn’s work is incomplete?
The author argues that Zinn focuses exclusively on resistant minorities and ignores the broader population, thereby failing to deliver a truly representative "people’s history."
How does the author assess the validity of Zinn's sources?
The author contends that Zinn uses uncritical or even "bogus" sources and often takes material out of context to fit his pre-existing neo-Marxist thesis.
What makes Paul Johnson’s approach more convincing to the NCHE?
Johnson’s work is seen as more modest, objective, and capable of fostering a spirit of unity and optimism, which the NCHE considers vital for contemporary American society.
How does the author differentiate between "gory stories" and "glory stories" in historiography?
The author maps Zinn's narrative to a "gory story" characterized by constant conflict, while associating Johnson's narrative with a "glory story" that acknowledges high ideals and long-term achievements.
- Quote paper
- Michael Neureiter (Author), 2010, Howard Zinn or Paul Johnson: Which Author´s Story Makes Better Sense of the History of the United States?, Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/168942
