I am only about half way through this week’s book, Claudette Colvin: Twice Toward Justice at the time of this post. I’m not going to write about this book directly, but I wanted to post about an essay concerning nonfiction that I read in one of Marc Aronson’s books. (You might remember that we read one or two pieces authored by Aronson near the beginning of the semester.) Aronson’s essay, which is from the book Beyond the Pale: New Essays for a New Era, is titled “The Pursuit of Happiness: Does American History Matter?” I found this essay to be quite relevant to this week’s reading, and it raised some questions that I am eager to explore as I continue my reading of Claudette Colvin, as well as some questions that I think are worth discussing in class.
Aronson discusses the lack of proper teaching of American history to children and teens in schools. He cites statistics that show that 18 percent of fourth graders, 17 percent of eighth graders and 10 percent of seniors are “B” students in the topic of American history (76). This means that 90 percent of high school seniors have a below-satisfactory grasp on the history of their own country.
He also brings up the issue of the history books that children and teens are given in school. He says that one pitfall of these books is that they offer young people “neatly packaged history…There is no imagination in these books; the predictable facts, dates, photos, and maps tell the same old stories in essentially the same old ways” (79). He also says that authors often feel forced to fictionalize historical information in order to make it more palatable to the younger generation who have been so heavily exposed to popular culture. Aronson says this implies that “history in itself is boring,” (80) and that writers must first recognize what they feel is important in America’s history in order to introduce new creativity into nonfiction. If this does not happen, nonfiction for young people will continue to be drab and dull.
I am not far enough into Claudette Colvin to know if it achieves this new creativity that makes American history both exciting and informative for young adults to read. I would love to hear what others think about Claudette Colvin in regards to Aronson’s essay in your comments.
I’d like to end with a quote from the essay to spark some discussion. Aronson says, “If we were today to write a book for young people, if all of us in this room sat down together to create a book on the history of freedom, of the struggle for freedom, of the idea of freedom, in American history, I think we’d have a great deal of trouble deciding how to do it. We’d either think we were sanitizing, or we’d lose our way in the exceptions. It would be easier just to write a novel about a young boy at Valley Forge, a girl on the home front during the Civil War” (81).
So, I ask you all: Is Claudette Colvin able to cover the broad spectrum of the Civil Rights movement in the format in which it was written? Why do you think Aronson said that we would find it easier to write a novel rather than a history?
Susan Elliott
This is something I was thinking about when I wrote my reflection for this week. I typically don't like non-fiction literature, but I really enjoyed this book. When reflecting on it, I think I learned more from this book than I did in my American History classes. I most middle and high school American History classes, the focus is on dates and names. I think this book brought something new to the table. It wasn't only about the dates of the legal battles that helped to change history, but it was about how one girl could make a difference. She stood up for what she believe in. This is the message that I think should be taught. The story didn't have to be fictionalized to make it more interesting. This is what happened, and to me I was taught more than I thought I would be.
ReplyDeleteAlisa
Susan, I am so glad you tracked down Marc Aronson's book. This book and his earlier collection EXPLODING THE MYTHS: THE TRUTH ABOUT TEENAGE READING are both filled with provocative, worthwhile essays. (I asked Martha Allen at Pius to buy them, and she did!) I also like that Marc Aronson walks the walk *and* talks the talk: he has written numerous books of history for teens himself, plus critical essays like the one you found.
ReplyDeleteWhat I love most about Aronson's ideas regarding history is that he fronts the question (here or possibly elsewhere) of how history is told. He raises the kinds of questions about the writing and shaping of history that I ask students to grapple with when they develop essays in composition class: what is your purpose? who is your audience? what questions do you want your readers to grapple with? He fronts the idea of authorial choice--that there are many ways to tell a story, and that history itself is a story constructed by those who write it. For every way a historical event has been written, there is another way, there is another telling.
Maybe if history class was about getting kids to grapple with those kinds of big questions about how we tell our national stories, form our interpretations of those stories, and account for the many stories that go untold or unattended to--instead of dwelling on the minutiae of the same old facts over and over again--more kids would get turned on to history, and we would have a more informed, reason-minded public.
Susan, You brought up a great question. I think because writing nonfiction books are difficult because of all of the research that has to go into them. Authors want to make sure they have their facts right. I think the way Philip Hoose wrote it was awesome. He included pictures and side information that kept my attion and kept me wanting to read.
ReplyDelete-Abby Kilian