I was reading the newspaper this morning on a early morning flight and there was an article talking about George Tenet's new book covering his tenure as the director of the CIA. The reporter Douglas J. Feith was somewhat skeptical of the story contained in the book, particularly with the events that appear to have been omitted, misstated, or incorrectly documented in the chronology.
This caused me to think about the overall question of what is history? This book is simply Mr. Tenet telling his side of the story, apparently cherry-picking events and facts to support it. In doing so, trying to adjust the populous recollection of the events that lead a country into war, with the end result of future generations looking upon him on a more favorable light. At the very least, it's a tome dedicated to the statement "It was not my fault".
The dictionary says: History
1. the branch of knowledge dealing with past events.
2. a continuous, systematic narrative of past events as relating to a particular people, country, period, person, etc., usually written as a chronological account; chronicle: a history of France; a medical history of the patient.
3. the aggregate of past events.
4. the record of past events and times, esp. in connection with the human race.
But there is another aspect here. I read about this particular historical account in the newspaper and because of that got a fairly detailed (even if edited and biased) understanding, with reasoning, as to why Mr. Feith thought this particular historical entry, is not such a good one. Today, most people, won't get that understanding. At best they will get a very carefully worded, 30 second sound bite from a media conglomerate that may or may not capture the essence of the entry (or indeed be factual), but will undoubtedly cast an opinion.
I took a look at possibly the oldest statements of history around and the newest. The Bible. This book comes in a huge number of different versions, all subtly different variations on the same theme. This book in all of its variations is actually a very carefully edited selection from the writings of mass of authors, with only a very small, carefully chosen, carefully edited selection of the actual writings were considered "suitable" for inclusion. The other more modern example, Wikipedia. This modern collection of knowledge is amassed and edited so quickly (and should someone post an unpopular edit, be corrected with blistering speed), that it has very quickly become the de-facto statement of the populous knowledge for the latest generation.
It seems that our recorded history has always been a very carefully edited accounting of events, where in fact, the most popular, or the most marketed and controlled version will ultimately win the prize of longevity and thus becoming the accepted version of events.
Some supposed "historical facts" to illustrate:
Al Gore "invented" the internet.
Saddam Hussein was responsible for the 9/11 attacks.
George Bush "won" to 2000 elections.
Bill Clinton "did not" have sex with Monica Lewinsky
The [7 fired] US Attorneys were doing a sub-standard job
See what I mean?
TC.
Technorati Tags: al gore, business, collaboration, Conservation, ecology, global warming, life, Marketing, Politics
why there are seventeen different kinds of vinegar or eight different kinds of pasta sauce in the supermarket isles? I have (but then I am sort of a nerd when it comes to that kind of thing).
Recent Comments