Anybody ever read the book "Out of Many: AHistory of the American People"?

[FreedomAngel82]

This term I'm taking three classes and one is US History and the book we're reading is "Out of Many: A History of the American People" and I'm wondering if anybody else here has had this book. Thanks in advanced.

[enlightenment]

1. Are you talking about the textbook?

Primary editor John Mack Faragher? That's a survey level textbook, not a monograph -- unless someone was assigned the text for a course (like you), they probably haven't read it. As a history instructor, I'd be willing to say that they probably didn't read it even if it was assigned . . . :)

It's not a bad text, as surveys go -- like anything else in life, you'll get out of it what you put into it. You might want to take a look at the textbook website; it has chapter summaries and quizzes to help you use the book successfully without registering. You might ask your instructor how you can go about registering for the rest of the site, there is probably a password available for the semester. Here's the URL:

http://cwx.prenhall.com/bookbind/pubbooks/faragher/

Good luck, learn a lot, share your knowledge, and remember -- have fun!

[FreedomAngel82]

2. Thanks!

It comes with a disc for your computer too so I'm sure more stuff on there. For some reason I'm really excited about this term which is a newbie for me!
Heh heh. :shrug: Now days I'm a big political junkie and history buff so this should be good I hope. I'm also taking socialogy which should be interesting.

[enlightenment]

4. You're welcome.

The disk probably has all the stuff the website does -- makes it simple. If you're new at this stuff, let me give you a hint: sometimes it's not so easy to click with your prof (in other words, you have to stab yourself in the leg with your pencil to stay awake). Don't let a not so exciting presentation put you off studying history. You already know how relevant it is (since you hang at DU) -- find the theme/s that are the most interesting to you (economics, politics, culture, society) and focus on understanding how it developed over time (I'm assuming you're starting with the first half of the survey). Focusing on something that is interesting to you makes understanding the whole easier.

[FreedomAngel82]

7. Thanks

Nah I'm not new to college or anything like that. And speaking of boring stuff I remember in high school I had a US History teacher who was SO boring. He would do lecture classes and his voice was real monotone and he'd ramble and go off sometimes of the subject. Plus, I had the class in the early afternoon directly after lunch. Heh heh. Luckily all my classes this time are before lunch. :P

[RoyGBiv]

3. I've read it ... still have it I think.

Well, I've read it as much as I've ever actually sat down and read a text book. Let's just say I've used it. :-)

[FreedomAngel82]

5. LOL

Did you like it? Is it pretty honest? I'm very skeptical now days of my history. ;) I still need to buy Howard Zinn's book. Boy I wish I could've had his book for my history class. Than again I'm in Tennessee so heh heh.

[RoyGBiv]

10. For a survey, it's good ...

I mean, it doesn't go into any depth on anything, which is the nature of the kind of book it is.

The study of history is in a way a search for levels of truth. What you read or learn may be true no matter the level of depth, but the application of that one truth to larger truths is where things get twitchy. If you think about anything you learn in a history course, you're going to start applying the lessons to other areas, but whether that application has any merit as you conceive it will depend in large part on the depth of what you know, or think you know at any rate.

The simplest yet most complicated example I can imagine from American history is the issue of slavery with regard to the origins of the American Civil War. What caused the Civil War? One can truthfully say "slavery." Okay, but what does *that* mean? How did slavery cause the war? Remove your preconceived notions and other knowledge and truly examine it. Was the Union trying to end slavery? No. Did slaves themselves start the fighting? No. Was the Confederacy trying to invade the Union to expand slavery? That's a gotcha because the answer is "maybe." More maybe's exist in the study of history than certainties or truths. People who interpret history and answer the maybes tend to be honest in their opinion, but their honesty may or may not translate to a truth.

And the point of me mentioning that is that a survey course will give you a very broad overview. The book you're using is an honest interpretation of various historical events, but if the professor does his or her job well, you'll leave the class with far more questions than answers. If you contrast it to Zinn's book, you might come away thinking it is full of lies. They aren't lies, not any more than Zinn's study is a lie, but it offers a particular point of view.

[enlightenment]

6. the official terminology among history professionals is . . .

"Yes, I'm familiar with that text." (Otherwise known as, "it's sitting on my bookshelf and I've read the table of contents.")
:evilgrin:

[FreedomAngel82]

8. LOL

:P

[RoyGBiv]

9. Ah, yes...I remember now.

Newbie PhD to the Dean of Humanities : "Did you read my dissertation? I believe it will completely change the way we study this subject."

Dean of Humanities : "Yes, I'm familiar with it. It will change many things, it is true." Translation : "Yeah, I saw the title page and read the prospectus. We're going to need to revamp the oral defense process to protect undergrads from people like you."

I miss campus. :-)

[enlightenment]

11. hehehe

yep, you've been there! Come on back -- there's always room for another pointy-headed liberal intellectual on the academic playground (where the bullies beat you with reviews, not rocks . . .)

On another, related, note -- have you read any of Eric Foner's works? A nice variety, particularly on Reconstruction, and a good companion to Zinn.

[RoyGBiv]

12. Yes, Foner is good ...

Short story ...

At one time I was a moderator of a Civil War discussion group, and one of the other mods got the bright idea of inviting known, professional historians to participate in a Q&A with our members, sort of like what you'd have at the end of a presentation or conference on a subject but without the roomfull of academics. Most of us thought it would never fly. Most of the people in the group were mere buffs. Some were Proudly Ignorant. But, we said sure, let's try it, and a few weeks later we had our first guest, James McPherson, who had *never* used the Internet, didn't have access to a computer, and essentially communicated with us via phone, dictating responses that had been typed on a bona fide old fashioned typwriter. It was bizarre, but very interesting.

So, anyway, there were a couple people in this group who were self-styled unreconstructed rebels who, naturally, hated Eric Foner and were constantly bashing him. Since it was a moderated group, a lot of the worst of what they said never made it into public, but the mods all saw it, and it was vicious. So, naturally, we had to invite Foner to stare down these people. He accepted (we were continually surprised at how willing these famous people were to participate) and it was one of the best things I have ever experienced. He is articulate, witty, and knows well how to lay on a backhanded insult that comes out sounding like revealed wisdom, the kind of the thing target doesn't even understand for a couple weeks, but when he does, feels about three inches tall.

I read the full version of his book on Reconstruction shortly before that. I found it rather dry reading, even if the treatment of the subject was exceptional, and was worried about his appearance in our group. I can only presume his personality doesn't come across well in his professional writing, or maybe he's the victim of bad editing. He's actually a wonderful writer, if the comments he made in the group are any guide.