What do you think?
Rate this book
Legends, Lies, and Cherished Myths of American History
The truth and nothing but the truth--Richard Shenkman sheds light on America's most believed story of Columbus discovered that the world was round was invented by Washington Irving.The pilgrims never lived in log cabins.In Concord, Massachusetts, a third of all babies born in the twenty years before the Revolution were conceived out of wedlock.Washington may have never told a lie, but he loved to drink and dance, and he fell in love with his best friend's wife.Independence wasn't declared on July 4 (and the Liberty Bell was so little regarded that Philadelphia tried to sell it for scrap metal but nobody wanted it).After World War II, the U.S. Government concluded that Japan would have surrendered within months, even if we had not bombed Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
202 pages, Hardcover
First published January 1, 1988
55 people are currently reading
850 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 63 reviews
December 31, 2012
Shenkman writes a relatively quick read, about 170 pages on all the things you thought you knew about American history but were wrong about. It's informative to a degree but I got sick of this book quickly. While I'm a firm believer in facts and truth trumping dogma of any kind, it's never fun to read 170 pages of "Hey, everything you believe is a lie!" And it doesn't help that Schenkman's writing style is glib and casual.
It says on the cover that this book was the inspiration for a show on cable, and that's how it reads. One factoid after another, one piece of history picked up, attacked, and then tossed aside for something new. And worse, some of the myths Shenkman debunks may have only been myths in Shenkman's head. He spends one chapter on the notion that American's believe most Presidents rose to power from poverty, and spells out the financial background of each and every one of them. The problem being, other than Lincoln (and Clinton, who came after this book was published), I've never believed, nor heard anyone suggest such a ridiculous assumption.
Some stories he tells are good, old fashioned debunkings, like when he details the partisan debate over whether Peary or Cook reached the North Pole first, and how certain outside parties with grudges may have influenced the public. On the other hand, for every one of those there's two petty little corrections like talking about how people had wrongly attributed the moving assembly line to Henry Ford, when it was really Ford working with engineers who he employed. It's not that Shenkman is wrong, it's that he gleefully lumps nit-pickings in along with actual revelations.
And then there's the question: is he wrong? Shenkman seems sure enough of his materials to speak glibly and confidently, but if this book proves anything it's that you can't automatically trust anyone to be free from ax-grinding and the exaggeration of stories to sell more books. The whole thing didn't leave me feeling awakened and better informed, it left me feeling paranoid and deflated. Besides, if you have all this information on what famous historian changed something to protect their thesis, or what famous fiction writer created a story that people started believing to be true, DO SOMETHING WITH IT! Give us at least a chapter on why people want to believe one story over the other.
It's a small point, but I also found very curious what Shenkman really responded to. He kept his totally even, cool, shallow grade scholarship tone when talking about how people celebrate Christopher Columbus even though he is now believed to have been responsible for the death and enslavement of several hundred thousand people (which should have inspired some outrage). But when it came time to debunk some attitudes towards Presidents he broke character for the first time and launched an attack on John F. Kennedy ("no amount of evidence seems to convince people he was anything but admirable...Greatness has been pinned on Kennedy like a rose that apparently won't wilt until a new generation that has no direct memory of him comes along.") What was Kennedy's great crime that earns him the most vitriolic condemnation (actually, the only vitriolic condemnation) of the book? That he fooled around with women. Oh, excuse me, that he fooled around with huge numbers of women, one of the "facts" that Shenkman doesn't studiously footnote in the book.
Let me be clear: there are a lot of interesting facts in this book. There is a great deal to be learned about how society chooses it's heroes, and how it remembers (or miss-remembers) it's past. But the author is just plain annoying. And insipid. And seems to be less interested in helping his readers come to a better understanding of America than he was with cataloging for all to see just how broad his grasp on historical trivia is. I'm going to have to go read some Howard Zinn or Sarah Vowell after this, just to enjoy how historical re-assessment reads when it's well done.
One star for being the sort of book that makes you want to say "Yes, you're right. Now shut up, and go away."
It says on the cover that this book was the inspiration for a show on cable, and that's how it reads. One factoid after another, one piece of history picked up, attacked, and then tossed aside for something new. And worse, some of the myths Shenkman debunks may have only been myths in Shenkman's head. He spends one chapter on the notion that American's believe most Presidents rose to power from poverty, and spells out the financial background of each and every one of them. The problem being, other than Lincoln (and Clinton, who came after this book was published), I've never believed, nor heard anyone suggest such a ridiculous assumption.
Some stories he tells are good, old fashioned debunkings, like when he details the partisan debate over whether Peary or Cook reached the North Pole first, and how certain outside parties with grudges may have influenced the public. On the other hand, for every one of those there's two petty little corrections like talking about how people had wrongly attributed the moving assembly line to Henry Ford, when it was really Ford working with engineers who he employed. It's not that Shenkman is wrong, it's that he gleefully lumps nit-pickings in along with actual revelations.
And then there's the question: is he wrong? Shenkman seems sure enough of his materials to speak glibly and confidently, but if this book proves anything it's that you can't automatically trust anyone to be free from ax-grinding and the exaggeration of stories to sell more books. The whole thing didn't leave me feeling awakened and better informed, it left me feeling paranoid and deflated. Besides, if you have all this information on what famous historian changed something to protect their thesis, or what famous fiction writer created a story that people started believing to be true, DO SOMETHING WITH IT! Give us at least a chapter on why people want to believe one story over the other.
It's a small point, but I also found very curious what Shenkman really responded to. He kept his totally even, cool, shallow grade scholarship tone when talking about how people celebrate Christopher Columbus even though he is now believed to have been responsible for the death and enslavement of several hundred thousand people (which should have inspired some outrage). But when it came time to debunk some attitudes towards Presidents he broke character for the first time and launched an attack on John F. Kennedy ("no amount of evidence seems to convince people he was anything but admirable...Greatness has been pinned on Kennedy like a rose that apparently won't wilt until a new generation that has no direct memory of him comes along.") What was Kennedy's great crime that earns him the most vitriolic condemnation (actually, the only vitriolic condemnation) of the book? That he fooled around with women. Oh, excuse me, that he fooled around with huge numbers of women, one of the "facts" that Shenkman doesn't studiously footnote in the book.
Let me be clear: there are a lot of interesting facts in this book. There is a great deal to be learned about how society chooses it's heroes, and how it remembers (or miss-remembers) it's past. But the author is just plain annoying. And insipid. And seems to be less interested in helping his readers come to a better understanding of America than he was with cataloging for all to see just how broad his grasp on historical trivia is. I'm going to have to go read some Howard Zinn or Sarah Vowell after this, just to enjoy how historical re-assessment reads when it's well done.
One star for being the sort of book that makes you want to say "Yes, you're right. Now shut up, and go away."
January 16, 2016
I wanted something quick, easy & entertaining to read on a bus trip. This more than sufficed. No great revelations, in my estimation, but definitely a few tidbits and angles I hadn't known about before. The introduction is passionate and very bold in its assertion at how truth is Important, then the author proceeds with flip, brief sketches that barely touch on a subject while clearly not wanting to relinquish being able to bring the subject up; this undermines the gravitas of the forward's intentions, just somewhat. Sometimes the voice really works. Sometimes the voice is a tad too smug and sharp in tone, that 'oh no really' cadence of laying down the Knowledge Law that can happen when telling truths while upending others. Also--perhaps owing to the decade+ time since publication--much of what was 'debunked' I felt I already knew a/o had a sense of (this is also likely, partially, attributable to how much nonfic & history I read).
Read
October 31, 2015Not as scurrilous as the title makes it sound, it's mostly a quick summary of how newer historical research can debunk self-serving or nostalgic representations of historical events and figures. What gives the book its poignancy, especially 20 years after its first publication, is how little most Americans even know the false "facts" that are debunked here. Do most Americans today believe that President Harding committed suicide, that the Underground Railroad helped tens of thousands of slaves escape, that Teddy Roosevelt charged up San Juan Hill -- or do they simply neither know nor care?
November 23, 2009
There is a lot of interesting historical information packed in this little volume. The writing style is easy to read.
If you do not read a lot of history, you might be suprised about the things you thought were true--that are either merely legends--or facts with some important details neededing to be corrected.
A quick, light popular history book---aimed at the aveage reader rather than history scholars. Very amsuing in spots.
If you do not read a lot of history, you might be suprised about the things you thought were true--that are either merely legends--or facts with some important details neededing to be corrected.
A quick, light popular history book---aimed at the aveage reader rather than history scholars. Very amsuing in spots.
May 22, 2016
Short and quick, it reads more like a list of incorrect myths than anything. Nothing too shocking or surprising here. I would have appreciated a little more detail. As it, it really just leaves me wanting to read a bigger book on the same subject.
Read
November 3, 2010An easy and quick read, but care should be taken to not put too much faith in Shenkman's work. This book may work better as a source for ideas, rather than a referenced source for a serious report.
February 5, 2012
Television news reporter (now there’s a credential) Shenkman attempts to debunk some widely-held but erroneous beliefs about American history from Columbus to the present day, covering topics such as sex, family, the so-called good old days, arts and quotations. It’s a fine and admirable idea for a book. Unfortunately, this book does not deliver the idea’s promise.
Shenkman uses nearly no primary sources, relying on modern historians’ research. This gives the result that in many instances, his “proof” of the falsity of a claim is simply another author’s claim. Shenkman also has an odd idea of what constitutes American history, often resorting to 17th-century history to refute claims of what “American” life really is. He also quotes extensively but cites sources sporadically, often lumping a few paragraph’s worth of sources together in one footnote. There are one or two nuggets of good stuff in here, like the origin of Paul Bunyan, or some of Harvard’s history, but the lack of primary sources and generally non-scholarly approach make this book somewhat interesting at best.
Shenkman uses nearly no primary sources, relying on modern historians’ research. This gives the result that in many instances, his “proof” of the falsity of a claim is simply another author’s claim. Shenkman also has an odd idea of what constitutes American history, often resorting to 17th-century history to refute claims of what “American” life really is. He also quotes extensively but cites sources sporadically, often lumping a few paragraph’s worth of sources together in one footnote. There are one or two nuggets of good stuff in here, like the origin of Paul Bunyan, or some of Harvard’s history, but the lack of primary sources and generally non-scholarly approach make this book somewhat interesting at best.
June 2, 2014
A mixed bag overall; some really interesting stories, but at times he doesn't expand on the truth and ends with just "that's not how it happened" which is unsatisfying; somewhat injects his personal politics in the text, which isn't necessary
October 18, 2016
Scattershot
This is best viewed as bathroom reading. There is little depth. Often a "myth" is referred to and refuted in their same sentence. It moves from specific facts to broad generalizations. It is also dated at this point in content and scholarship.
This is best viewed as bathroom reading. There is little depth. Often a "myth" is referred to and refuted in their same sentence. It moves from specific facts to broad generalizations. It is also dated at this point in content and scholarship.
May 31, 2019
175 pages of mostly tedious claims, attempting to debunk traditional folklore and American history taught in childhood textbooks. There are few facts or evidence presented to back up most of the claims. A 70% boring read that leaves you questioning if anything you've ever been taught is real.
may-read
July 5, 2015After World War II, the U.S. Government concluded that Japan would have surrendered within months, even if we had not bombed Hiroshima and Nagasaki. - I find this hard to believe.
May 8, 2014
Abandoned this one. Didn't like the smug,smart-alecky style of writing. And most of the "surprises" are old hat.
February 16, 2022
Nothing particularly new here and the author's tone throughout was off putting, but I was glad to see Victoria Woodhull's name pop up.
February 1, 2010
Lies, Legends, and Cherished Myths of American History by Richard Shenkman has the kind of title to make one cringe. One may well picture a self-righteous professor blasting his gullible readers and their hypocritical teachers, for rejecting truth in favor of fairy tales like Plymouth Rock and George Washington and the Cherry Tree. Instead, Shenkman takes a warmer, more understanding, almost celebratory tone towards the material. He also makes it clear that many of these “cherished myths” are no longer believed, and haven’t been believed for generations. He also explains where they came from and why they were believed.
I also really appreciated how he attacked old myths, current myths AND the revisionist myths too. If the Puritans were not the good, decent folk we used to believe in, then neither were they the baby-eating monster of many current interpretations.
Perhaps he is a leeetle too condescending in spots; occasionally his conclusions are drawn a little too cavalierly. For example he “debunks” the myth that early Americans cherished children and paints a picture of a dour and joyless childhood. I have read elsewhere that this grim picture is itself a myth and that while life was hard, children were given playtime and toys did exist. Also some sources are given greater weight – i.e. are held to more believable – than others and it is not always clear why.
Such lapses are, however, in the minority. For the most part, it was a warm and humorous and eminently balanced book.
I also really appreciated how he attacked old myths, current myths AND the revisionist myths too. If the Puritans were not the good, decent folk we used to believe in, then neither were they the baby-eating monster of many current interpretations.
Perhaps he is a leeetle too condescending in spots; occasionally his conclusions are drawn a little too cavalierly. For example he “debunks” the myth that early Americans cherished children and paints a picture of a dour and joyless childhood. I have read elsewhere that this grim picture is itself a myth and that while life was hard, children were given playtime and toys did exist. Also some sources are given greater weight – i.e. are held to more believable – than others and it is not always clear why.
Such lapses are, however, in the minority. For the most part, it was a warm and humorous and eminently balanced book.
February 8, 2015
A quick and witty jaunt down the avenues of American history, the lack of primary sources will probably put off the more discerning reader of history. That aside, the author shares some of his own favorite historians' insights into the many legends surrounding that create the American mythos from the country's first Puritans to the sacred cows of Kennedy and Reagan.
Conversational in style, I do have to remove stars for the simple fact that in Shenkman's haste to debunk he often oversimplifies very complex matters and turns to his own subjective reasoning when faced with subjects that can't be condensed into listicle-esque sound bites. His treatment of the realities of the Jewish immigrant experience in 19th century America and the realities of the American prison system (he mentions that more people are being imprisoned, contrary to popular belief, but omits that the prison system disproportionately targets and incarcerates poorer communities) shows that he the typical "skim" approach when it comes to history.
He glosses and skips over important details or considerations while including detailed analysis of trivialities like George Washington's dressing habits.
A semi-decent introduction to the behind-the-scenes of mainstream American pop-myth, it might be better to head off to his bibliography and give his sources a read instead.
Conversational in style, I do have to remove stars for the simple fact that in Shenkman's haste to debunk he often oversimplifies very complex matters and turns to his own subjective reasoning when faced with subjects that can't be condensed into listicle-esque sound bites. His treatment of the realities of the Jewish immigrant experience in 19th century America and the realities of the American prison system (he mentions that more people are being imprisoned, contrary to popular belief, but omits that the prison system disproportionately targets and incarcerates poorer communities) shows that he the typical "skim" approach when it comes to history.
He glosses and skips over important details or considerations while including detailed analysis of trivialities like George Washington's dressing habits.
A semi-decent introduction to the behind-the-scenes of mainstream American pop-myth, it might be better to head off to his bibliography and give his sources a read instead.
December 22, 2022
A good compliment to the "Myth America" TV series.
As with most TV series you get statements without support. So I tracked down the Richard Shenkiman book to get some background to the statements about American myths. I was not disappointed. It is as if he was reading this book on TV with more graphic representations of the different media.
The book is worth reading. However, the format may not be to some peoples liking as it is short choppy statements and the chapters are divided into subjects such as Discoverers and Inventors, Presidents, Sex, and Art.
There is a fair set of footnotes to lead you to further reading. You may need this as he sometimes stretches a point.
Final analysis, you are better off reading this to give a better perspective on reality. Read it to your kids and save them a lifetime of "Legends, Lies & Cherished Myths of American History".
As with most TV series you get statements without support. So I tracked down the Richard Shenkiman book to get some background to the statements about American myths. I was not disappointed. It is as if he was reading this book on TV with more graphic representations of the different media.
The book is worth reading. However, the format may not be to some peoples liking as it is short choppy statements and the chapters are divided into subjects such as Discoverers and Inventors, Presidents, Sex, and Art.
There is a fair set of footnotes to lead you to further reading. You may need this as he sometimes stretches a point.
Final analysis, you are better off reading this to give a better perspective on reality. Read it to your kids and save them a lifetime of "Legends, Lies & Cherished Myths of American History".
May 12, 2010
This was a re-read for me, and although it's somewhat dated due to when it was written, it's still a good read and gives a quick summary of the myths that drive the American people...the ones they think are historically factual especially. As with any "real" history book, Shenkman notes his sources so he can be "fact-checked", something historians and other social scientists have been doing for almost a century. Still, reading some other reviews, I have to believe that many do not understand what notation is for, that you can read the sources to verify that what the author is writing is factual. Instead of offering a knee-jerk review based on the author revealing the myths some hold as sacred, they should learn how to read history.
June 11, 2016
Feels dated (it was published near the end of Ronald Reagan's presidency!) Our point of view on American history is shaped by whomever is writing our history books. Some of the myths that Shenkman dispels are now common knowledge. For example, most readers will not be surprised that Columbus is not the discoverer of America nor was he a good guy. Depending on your prior knowledge, others will be a surprise. And some will be questioned by astute readers, like Americans being better off than they have ever have been. Guess it depends on your definition of middle class.
If you are looking for a better researched or more detailed book, read A People!s History of the United States by Howard Zinn.
If you are looking for a better researched or more detailed book, read A People!s History of the United States by Howard Zinn.
August 8, 2008
Okay, I picked this book up for the bathroom library.... but then I got hooked into skimming the whole thing last night.
It is worth a skim; not sure about the accuracy, and he does make some rather broad assertions... but I did appreciate it because it was a good poke to my consciousness, when I sink into "oh, why don't xxx do like they used it...." kind of thinking....
I did think it was good that Shenkman had footnotes (not that I checked on them, obviously; I skimmed), and I think my kids might really enjoy it (12, 10), but really, not too serious for those serious about history....
It is worth a skim; not sure about the accuracy, and he does make some rather broad assertions... but I did appreciate it because it was a good poke to my consciousness, when I sink into "oh, why don't xxx do like they used it...." kind of thinking....
I did think it was good that Shenkman had footnotes (not that I checked on them, obviously; I skimmed), and I think my kids might really enjoy it (12, 10), but really, not too serious for those serious about history....
May 30, 2015
Having read the sequel to this text, Legends, Lies & Cherished Myths of World History a few years ago, I knew I would easily be sucked into this work. Shenkman does an excellent job relaying his information in a fluid manner without coming across too flippant or unprofessional, and the amount of sources used to create this volume is incredibly abundant. In some ways, the book is a breath of fresh air as many of the myths listed in this book are not ones held as prominently anymore, but read in combination with a work like James W. Loewen's Lies My Teacher Told Me, it is clear that not all of these myths have been dispelled.
July 28, 2022
Snarky, short segments. Much of it is irrelevant. But it was brief & humorous enough. Told entirely (& admittedly) from a Eurocentric view, it rambles about outdated rumors and cavils at small histories. What was Shenkman’s purpose here? To dig up dirt on Gandhi, maybe, or dispel the myth of King Arthur—do we really care? IDK. But the dirt on Gandhi WAS interesting & galling, and the opening on Socrates and hemlock was insightful. Altogether though, this book is pretty shallow and has little to offer. Fine for a flight, or afternoon in a library browsing the shelves, but totally okay to pass up.
October 12, 2012
The book is at its best in chapters ("The Family", "Sex", etc.) that are more systematic about deconstructing preconceptions, and it's at its worst when a chapter is little more than a bullet-point enumeration of corrected information.
It's more of a launching point for an interest than a resource in itself. The references are for the most part secondary sources, which weakens its value. A reader interested in some set of revelations would be encouraged to track down the works in question, instead of relying on this as an authority.
It's more of a launching point for an interest than a resource in itself. The references are for the most part secondary sources, which weakens its value. A reader interested in some set of revelations would be encouraged to track down the works in question, instead of relying on this as an authority.
June 12, 2019
This was a fun book to read with lots of information. I read a lot of history so a lot of this wasn't new to me. I did enjoy reading about the folk heroes and the chapter on the immigrants was very relevant in today's world.
I had a couple of problems with the book: I would have liked more detail about Shenkman's claims and Shenkman gets a little snarky; sometimes that's funny and sometimes it's annoying.
Even with these problems this book is worth a read, especially if all you know of history is what you got in school.
I had a couple of problems with the book: I would have liked more detail about Shenkman's claims and Shenkman gets a little snarky; sometimes that's funny and sometimes it's annoying.
Even with these problems this book is worth a read, especially if all you know of history is what you got in school.
October 30, 2012
Interesting stories. Many were not myths or at least I've their heard the debate on their veracity. One interesting thing I noticed was that although almost all the authors suppositions were supported by research and footnotes many of those only had one reference while if researching the "myths" you could easily find more references to the validity of the myth. I don't say that makes the author wrong only how little we can really be certain of so many truths we take for granted.
June 17, 2010
Some of the information in this book is interesting.
But it's tarred with the "gotcha" spirit of the whole. While that's fun at first, it grows increasingly more grating as pages pass.
Also, the author is far too fond of citing items as wrong that aren't, just because he apparently doesn't understand them. That's a bad feature...
But it's tarred with the "gotcha" spirit of the whole. While that's fun at first, it grows increasingly more grating as pages pass.
Also, the author is far too fond of citing items as wrong that aren't, just because he apparently doesn't understand them. That's a bad feature...
August 27, 2019
Entertaining and completely contrarian. If we are to believe Shenkman, we have to stop believing quite a bit of what we thought we knew. He kind of makes you want to research... to refute the refuter.
July 21, 2018
In the age of Snopes and other Internet resources, this book is outdated and smug. Add in the drastic need for a copy editor and I just couldn't finish it.
November 16, 2019
The great value of books like these is they force us to question our passive acceptance of spoon fed history
February 11, 2020
Some of it was really interesting and some of it not
August 7, 2024
A TV NEWSMAN PUNCTURES MANY HISTORICAL "MYTHS" OF AMERICA
Richard Schenkman is a TV news reporter stationed in Washington, D.C.; he is also the author/coauthor of 'One-Night Stands with American History,' and 'Legends, Lies & Cherished Myths of World History.'
He says in the "Author's Note" which begins this 1988 book, "We usually admit that Americans are somewhat ignorant of history, but we don't realize how ignorant... Not only have they forgotten what they should remember, but they have remembered what they should have forgotten... What Americans seem to remember from their history... is all that's mythical... Americans are not to blame for knowing so much that is not worth knowing. Even historians have been taken in."
He states, "That [Henry] Ford should be regarded as something of a progressive because of the five-dollar day is the most bizarre of all the myths about him... He instituted the five-dollar day mainly to achieve a stable work force and only incidentally to improve the welfare of his employees... The assembly line had proved to be a worker's nightmare, and the only way to keep the worker from leaving was to pay him or her better than the usual wage." (Pg. 15)
He points out, "Claims on behalf of [John F.] Kennedy's major literary works stand up no better to sustained scrutiny than the discredited PT-109 story... Kennedy's undergraduate thesis, Why England Slept, was based partly on research provided by ... a friend of Kennedy's rich father... The better-known Profiles in Courage, for which Kennedy received a Pulitzer Prize, was also prepared by others... [it was] written by and large by Theodore Sorensen, one of Kennedy's speech writers." (Pg. 48)
He says, "The belief that the loyalist opposition to the [American] Revolution constituted an insignificant threat to the cause is widespread but spurious... Almost as many Americans fought for Britain as fought against Britain. In 1780, when there were nine thousand patriots in Washington's army, eight thousand loyalists served in the British Army." (Pg. 78)
He asserts, "The often-repeated allegation that the decision to drop the atomic bomb was horrid in light of the known effects of radiation is misinformed. No one knew anyone would die of radiation. Not even those who created the bomb in the first place knew that." (Pg. 99)
He argues that "The popular image of the [Western] frontier as a place of violence... is due to hype, particularly Hollywood hype... In the real Dodge City, for instance, there were just five killings in 1878, the most homicidal year in the little town's frontier history... In the worst year in Tombstone, home of the shoot-out at the OK Corral, only five people were killed. The only reason the OK Corral shoot-out even became famous was that town boosters deliberately overplayed the drama to attract new settlers." (Pg. 109)
One might wish that Shenkman would always give the SOURCES for his assertions (he does sometimes, however); but this book is nevertheless an enlightening and entertaining "corrective" for many popular misconceptions of American history.
Richard Schenkman is a TV news reporter stationed in Washington, D.C.; he is also the author/coauthor of 'One-Night Stands with American History,' and 'Legends, Lies & Cherished Myths of World History.'
He says in the "Author's Note" which begins this 1988 book, "We usually admit that Americans are somewhat ignorant of history, but we don't realize how ignorant... Not only have they forgotten what they should remember, but they have remembered what they should have forgotten... What Americans seem to remember from their history... is all that's mythical... Americans are not to blame for knowing so much that is not worth knowing. Even historians have been taken in."
He states, "That [Henry] Ford should be regarded as something of a progressive because of the five-dollar day is the most bizarre of all the myths about him... He instituted the five-dollar day mainly to achieve a stable work force and only incidentally to improve the welfare of his employees... The assembly line had proved to be a worker's nightmare, and the only way to keep the worker from leaving was to pay him or her better than the usual wage." (Pg. 15)
He points out, "Claims on behalf of [John F.] Kennedy's major literary works stand up no better to sustained scrutiny than the discredited PT-109 story... Kennedy's undergraduate thesis, Why England Slept, was based partly on research provided by ... a friend of Kennedy's rich father... The better-known Profiles in Courage, for which Kennedy received a Pulitzer Prize, was also prepared by others... [it was] written by and large by Theodore Sorensen, one of Kennedy's speech writers." (Pg. 48)
He says, "The belief that the loyalist opposition to the [American] Revolution constituted an insignificant threat to the cause is widespread but spurious... Almost as many Americans fought for Britain as fought against Britain. In 1780, when there were nine thousand patriots in Washington's army, eight thousand loyalists served in the British Army." (Pg. 78)
He asserts, "The often-repeated allegation that the decision to drop the atomic bomb was horrid in light of the known effects of radiation is misinformed. No one knew anyone would die of radiation. Not even those who created the bomb in the first place knew that." (Pg. 99)
He argues that "The popular image of the [Western] frontier as a place of violence... is due to hype, particularly Hollywood hype... In the real Dodge City, for instance, there were just five killings in 1878, the most homicidal year in the little town's frontier history... In the worst year in Tombstone, home of the shoot-out at the OK Corral, only five people were killed. The only reason the OK Corral shoot-out even became famous was that town boosters deliberately overplayed the drama to attract new settlers." (Pg. 109)
One might wish that Shenkman would always give the SOURCES for his assertions (he does sometimes, however); but this book is nevertheless an enlightening and entertaining "corrective" for many popular misconceptions of American history.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 63 reviews