| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| movingrobewoman |
Posted - October 17 2006 : 4:34:25 PM
I found the following quotes helpful in the introduction section of Indian Yell: The Heart Of An American Insurgency, by Michael Blake. Yes, he's the guy who wrote Dances With Wolves as well as Marching To Valhalla:
"Recorded history is plagued with the same deficiencies common in everyday journalism ... Even the priceless, first person accounts of the last, decisive battles between Indian and White are inherently flawed. Has the memory on display deteriorated with age? Could the eyewitnesses have embellished what they have seen? Could personal aggrandizement be a factor? How could we know?
Even if a statement was given in a perfectly straightforward manner, it could not be accepted as pure truth. As Akira Kurosawa's film Rashomon so ably demonstrates, the simultaneous perceptions of those watching a drama unfold are remarkably different from one another ..."
Perhaps one of the better summations I've seen. |
| 4 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| joseph wiggs |
Posted - January 20 2007 : 8:24:10 PM
Absolutely, memory is not an unblemished recollection of past events. It is, rather, a personal interpretation of past events heavily influenced by personal motives.
We all remember the "good ole days" that, in actuality, not all that good. |
| AZ Ranger |
Posted - January 01 2007 : 8:27:20 PM
b]defining truth would be a monumental chore.[/b]
Defining truth is easy - telling it for some is not, for some recollection and truth are not the same, and a rare few actually are truthful without errors. |
| joseph wiggs |
Posted - December 15 2006 : 8:00:58 PM
"What is truth?"
Unless one resides in a vacuum, unaffected by natural, environmental influences and, blessed with the wisdom of Job, defining truth would be a monumental chore. Thus, the summation you presented is absolutely right on. What we speak is always influenced by personal motive. What we described is not based on actuality but, how we interpret reality.
Regarding the discerning of the possibility or impossibility of any historical event,the best we mortals can do is to gather evidence, corroborate when possible, and make a valued judgment based upon facts and probability. Unless you are fortunate enough to video an memorable event, truth is pretty much impossible to capture in any case. An example of this would be the infamous judicial travesty commonly referred to as the "O.J." trail.
Any attempt to "approach" truth should include a conglomeration of ALL available information and not selective "facts" that only serve to disprove or prove a personal perspective.
Once again, MRW, you bring wisdom to the table. Thank you. |
| AZ Ranger |
Posted - October 18 2006 : 10:37:01 AM
MRW
I couldn't agree more.
AZ Ranger |
|
|
