Hello all,
Regarding the finding of Cook's statue, personally i feel that the money would be used to improve the education system's presentation of Australian history allowing for a broader and potentially more accurate representation to future generations.
Hey,
Welcome to Atar Notes!! Super keen to read all of your thoughts!
I definitely think that a statue of Captain Cook (especially one worth $48.7 million!!) is a waste of money. I’m going into education so I would love more money to go into schools and history ed. How do you think history should be presented (and changed) within our schools? What isn’t taught now that you’d love to have? What do you believe has been taught inaccurately/with bias?
I think at the moment the history that we learn is very Eurocentric (e.g in years 11/12 I mainly looked at Rome/Greece). There are some cultures/events that have been completely left out for me (honestly, I know almost nothing about African or Asian history). Ultimately, the history that we are taught is incredibly bias (politically through our syllabus, but also through the individual teachers who are teaching it (and in yr 11/12 choosing our option topics). Do you think there is any way to try and decrease this bias when learning/in the classroom?
However, governments are inherently influenced by political and social agendas, and with the Cook statue, i personally think that it was done to, as owidjaja stated, 'promote nationalism'. More importantly, it has the potential to unite Australians under this one figure who is regarded as important and respected (generally speaking) as an Australian icon by people regardless of their political opinions whereas the government is seen through a more partisan lens. So while Cook may not be the first to discover Australia and while the construction of this statue glorifies the wrong people, i can see why the government would dunk so much money into it. That said, i do think it should have been diverted into other areas but it wouldn't be as showy or have the same social effect as a $49 million statue.
Yeah, I agree with this that it is a form of Nationalism. I think that Captain Cook is ingrained into our culture (and to some extent our identity) through our education.
Regarding the recognition of oral history, i think it does need to be used more broadly in history. Though i did study the Reynolds v Windschuttle debate in class, the majority of my experience with this issue came through my major work which focused on Early 20th century Africa. Similar to the Aboriginal Australians and their tradition, many native African cultures lacked any written communication, couple that with the lack of formal educational opportunities during that period for native Africans and you have yourself a lack of histories/sources which explore that unique and important perspective.
I think that oral history should be used as a legitimate form of source. I definitely think that we 100% can’t just invalidate/write off entire cultures because their traditions and construction of history/use of oral evidence is different to ours. I believe that any source is flawed-just because something is written down doesn’t make it heaps more reliable. For example, Pliny the younger wrote his account of the eruption of Pompeii 10 years after it had actually happened, however he was one of the only key witnesses of the event who wrote about it.
Building upon the statement by Owidjaja about the exploration of memory in history, i find that oral or more personal accounts of the past tend to be infused with emotion which is really insightful if you're trying to understand what people went through. i went on a school excursion to a Jewish museum where we were given a lecture by a historian studying the Holocaust. I apologise for not being able to recall her name but she talked about an account by a Polish Holocaust survivor and how the Nazis executed members of the survivor's town on a freezing winters day. Through some more research, a newspaper was found from the area where the execution took place and it revealed that it was one of the hottest summer days that town had for a few years. So while oral accounts, particularly ones which come from someone who had been personally affected by the event, may not be historically accurate, it does help in providing insight into this period of their lives and the event from a personal perspective.
I went to the Jewish museum in year 10 as an excursion and also did my major on the Holocaust. My question was looking at 2 conflicting interpretations of the perpetrator motivations of Police Battalion 101 during the Holocaust. Regarding oral sources, one of my historian’s major piece of evidence was testimonies from Holocaust perpetrators. One of the issues with this was determining which ones were true because obviously they may have been lying (the actions they had committed were horrific & were filled with so many emotions). One of my historians, Goldhagen only chose to use information that was self-incriminatory all of the time. However, my other historian, Browning, used evidence that was self-incriminatory, and ones that told the truth some of the time. They both left out testimonies that were obviously untruthful.
(a little off topic, bit still interesting!)I think that there are limitations to oral sources-however we can’t really expect full accurate objective truth from any source. While I don’t think the weather on the day is a major factor, in your example, it depends on what is being studied, and then could affect the reliability and accuracy of the account as a whole. However, I also think that oral testimonies such as this, are effective in showing the perspectives and thoughts/beliefs of individuals at the time (probably a lot more than an academic history book would). Similarly, there a lot more accessible to the general public and therefore easier to listen to and empathise with.
So thats my two cents on this topic. Hopefully it provides a different perspective, feel free to argue or build upon it!
Thanks for sharing your opinions! Was great to read them!!
Feel free to argue against, build upon or pick apart what I’ve written! I haven’t done history since last year so could definitely be a bit rusty (& a little jumbled/off topic at times!). Otherwise, I would love to hear your opinions on anything Susie has brought up earlier in the thread or your own debate ideas! If you have any questions on navigating the forums, feel free to ask or message me!
LochNessMonster and Kristieevans, I’m going to try to respond to your comments early this week. Good luck for your exam this afternoon! Hope it goes really well!! 
Home
Help
Search
Login
