[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: Historians



How many is "many"?  The majority??? 10%  Any sources for this?
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-KOREAN-WAR-L@raven.cc.ku.edu [mailto:owner-KOREAN-WAR-L@raven.cc.ku.edu]On Behalf Of ysk
Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2002 04:56
To: KOREAN-WAR-L@raven.cc.ku.edu
Subject: Re: Historians

Interesting POV on historians.
 
Unfortunately, many historians are more propagandists than scholars - deepening on their paymaster.    It seems the Korean War has its share of propaganda-historians.
 
 
ysk
-------------------
As generally understood, propaganda is opinion expressed for the purpose of influencing actions of individuals or groups... Propaganda thus differs fundamentally from scientific analysis. The propagandist tries to "put something across," good or bad. The scientist does not try to put anything across; he devotes his life to the discovery of new facts and principles. The propagandist seldom wants careful scrutiny and criticism; his object is to bring about a specific action. The scientist, on the other hand, is always prepared for and wants the most careful scrutiny and criticism of his facts and ideas. Science flourishes on criticism. Dangerous propaganda crumbles before it.
 
Learn everything you need to know about propaganda at:
 
 
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2002 6:37 AM
Subject: Historians

I'm "on the road" so I hope this message gets through to the list. 
Forgive me for wandering just slightly off subject.

It's interesting that this thread about historians (and writers) should
come up at this particular time.  A writer friend of mine forwarded the
following Forbes' URL to me - the article is about Stephen Ambrose
and some recent questions regarding his writing ethics. 
http://forbes.com/2002/01/07/0107ambrose.html

As a writer myself, there is one thing I have learned in my career: never
try to pass off something as something else.  This includes plagerizing
and passing fiction off as fact.

There is however a way to write non-fiction using fictional techniques. 
It's called creative non-fiction.  It does not change historical facts, but
allows writers to set up scenarios using dialogue and other fiction
techniques to make a story more readable.  But it MUST follow
historical fact.

Judy


--------------------------------------------------------------------
mail2web - Check your email from the web at
http://mail2web.com/ .