Like what you've read?

On Line Opinion is the only Australian site where you get all sides of the story. We don't
charge, but we need your support. Here�s how you can help.

  • Advertise

    We have a monthly audience of 70,000 and advertising packages from $200 a month.

  • Volunteer

    We always need commissioning editors and sub-editors.

  • Contribute

    Got something to say? Submit an essay.


 The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
On Line Opinion logo ON LINE OPINION - Australia's e-journal of social and political debate

Subscribe!
Subscribe





On Line Opinion is a not-for-profit publication and relies on the generosity of its sponsors, editors and contributors. If you would like to help, contact us.
___________

Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Why our greatest story is just not being told

By Kevin Donnelly - posted Monday, 30 January 2006


Australian teachers are also told that how one interprets history is subjective and relative to one’s culture and place. As argued by the History Teachers’ Association of Victoria in the early 90s:

One of the great developments in history teaching has been the emphasis on the nature of representations, or versions, of history. There is no single version of history which can be presented to students.

History is a version of the past which varies according to the person and the times ... So not only is there no single version of history, but each generation re-interprets the past in the light of its own values and attitudes.

Advertisement

Taken to its logical conclusion, such a view allows Japanese textbooks to ignore the rape of Nanking and for the British author, David Irving, to deny that millions were killed in the holocaust.

The belief that different versions of the past are of equal value and that each generation has the right to re-interpret history in terms of current values also allows revisionist historians to judge past actions in terms of what is now considered politically correct.

As a result, today’s historians describe the First Fleet as an invasion even though the Admiralty had given Governor Phillip express orders to co-exist with the Indigenous population and Phillip, after being speared, did not punish those responsible.

As noted by the Monash University historian, Mark Peel, of greater concern is that generations of students no longer understand or appreciate the grand narrative associated with the rise of Western Civilisation and Australia’s development as a nation.

Peel states:

Students seem anxious about the absence of a story by which to comprehend change, or to understand how the nation and world they are about to inherit came to be …

Advertisement

Indeed their sense of the world’s history is often based upon intense moments and fragments that have no real momentum or connection … The 20th century is largely composed of snatches, moments that rarely gel into a longer narrative.

As expected, advocates of the new history, such as Stuart Macintyre from The University of Melbourne, argue that the more traditional approach to history teaching is obsolete, inequitable and educationally unsound.

In The History Wars Macintyre argues in defence of the new history, one were the view of history as a dispassionate discipline seeking to interpret and record the past is replaced by one that focuses on celebrating and empowering the marginalised and the dispossessed.

Macintyre also complains that any criticism of the new history is a media beat up and that John Howard is simply involved in “wedge politics” calculated to pander to “public opinion”.

In opposition to Prime Minister Howard’s criticisms, Macintyre extols the virtues of Paul Keating’s “big picture” approach to Australian history, supposedly, one that embraced “diversity and tolerance with an egalitarian generosity”.

Ignored, as demonstrated by recent elections, is that the Australian people have passed judgment on the history wars and the black armband view, so prevalent during the Keating years, has been rejected.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. Page 2
  4. All

First published in The Australian on January 28, 2006.



Discuss in our Forums

See what other readers are saying about this article!

Click here to read & post comments.

41 posts so far.

Share this:
reddit this reddit thisbookmark with del.icio.us Del.icio.usdigg thisseed newsvineSeed NewsvineStumbleUpon StumbleUponsubmit to propellerkwoff it

About the Author

Dr Kevin Donnelly is a Senior Research Fellow at the Australian Catholic University and he recently co-chaired the review of the Australian national curriculum. He can be contacted at kevind@netspace.net.au. He is author of Australia’s Education Revolution: How Kevin Rudd Won and Lost the Education Wars available to purchase at www.edstandards.com.au

Other articles by this Author

All articles by Kevin Donnelly

Creative Commons LicenseThis work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.

Photo of Kevin Donnelly
Article Tools
Comment 41 comments
Print Printable version
Subscribe Subscribe
Email Email a friend
Advertisement

About Us Search Discuss Feedback Legals Privacy