The statement that there is distortion of facts in history in books is also surely a matter of subjective interpretation, heavily dependent on the mood and the opinion of the person who considers the issue. That view need not be correct always, and it need not be correct because any individual holds that view. History is a record of sorts of what happened, or at least what happened according to the understanding or perspective of the author who recorded, or reconstructed the history. There could have been distortion during the process of recording or interpretation, and alternately, the recording could have been correct too. If one is to give the give a view that history in books are distorted, and if that view is honest, such view should evolve on the basis of some fresh or very compelling evidence the person holding such view possesses. In most cases, in almost all cases, people who make such statements are just firing shots in the dark, and often they are misleading the readers often through verbosity.
A statement based on verifiable facts, however silly that statement is far better and acceptable than those generalities.
No comments:
Post a Comment