Who Killed Canadian History? Review

Average Reviews:

(More customer reviews)Are you looking to buy Who Killed Canadian History? Here is the right place to find the great deals. we can offer discounts of up to 90% on Who Killed Canadian History. Check out the link below:

>> Click Here to See Compare Prices and Get the Best Offers

Who Killed Canadian History ReviewProfessor Granatstien has presented readers with a very interesting book with "Who Killed Canadian History?". It has generated a great deal of debate within history cirlces - both good and bad.
The book itself is a quick read, coming in at a very short 149 pages. the main thrust of Grantstien's argument is that the pursuit of social history in Canada (which encompasses many fields such as Native and feminist histories) has swung too far. The result is that few people emerging out of the public chool system know much about thier national history. In fact, Grantstien claims that we are losing our history. The book is a polemic in this regard. Grantstien casts a wide net of blame in what he percieves to be the decline of historical knowledge in Canada.
Of course, this all begs the question as to whose "history" Dr. Grantstien is referring to? By no means is Canadian history dead. Critics of Granatstien and others like him such as Michael Bliss, believe that the history these people are advocating is that of a bygone era. Before the revolution in "social" history of the laet 1960s and early 1970s history tended to be based on the actions of the proverbial dead, white, male, politician (see Donald Creighton). The history that Grantstien advocates is usually cast in this light. The implication being that this history will once again marginalize the stories of women, natives, minorities, etc...
I personally do not believe that is what the debate is about. Grantstien is unfairly cast as some unsensitive brute who wants to turn the clock back to when the writing of history was much easier. When in reality he is simple percieving the historiographical trend as similar to a pendulum. If indeed social history was marginalized in the past, than "traditional" history (that which focuses on politics, the individual, etc...) has been marginalized in the current context. What he seeks is a happy middle ground, one in which both "social" and "traditional" history recieve the same amount of attention.
If you are interested in this book, then you should also look up some of the reactions it has generated among other historians. The Canadian Historical Review is where the debate seems to be most intense. An article by A.B. McKillop sumarizes the argument that "social" historians have against Granatstien, while an article by Bryan Palmer in the Dec. 1999 issue presents a very interesting third point of view that is quite different from both that of Grantstien and McKillop (I personally think the Palmer article is the better, even if he harbours some resentment over the marginalization of Marxist theory from the "cutting edge" of the discipline). If you wish to read something by supporters of the Grantstien thesis you can check-out an article by Robin Fisher in the 100th issue of BC Studies in 1994. Michael Bliss has also put out some material on this issue as well.Who Killed Canadian History Overview

Want to learn more information about Who Killed Canadian History?

>> Click Here to See All Customer Reviews & Ratings Now