Difference between revisions of "426--Week 9 Questions/Comments--Tuesday"
From McClurken Wiki
(→The Making of More Americans) |
(→On Discovery & On Fathers) |
||
| Line 12: | Line 12: | ||
Going back to the issue of sources -- if these are stories passed down by family members, we have to wonder how accurate these stories really are. The person telling the story could have left things out which they felt gave the family a poor name or something of the sort. I feel that if there was more context to this book it would be more useful. -- Kari W. | Going back to the issue of sources -- if these are stories passed down by family members, we have to wonder how accurate these stories really are. The person telling the story could have left things out which they felt gave the family a poor name or something of the sort. I feel that if there was more context to this book it would be more useful. -- Kari W. | ||
| + | |||
| + | Kind of going off Kari's comment, there are things that just might have been forgotten over the years. Oral histories are always hard to trust because things are so easily left out either on purpose or accidentally. I think it's an interesting route to take as far as a secondary source is concerned. It's different from what we've been reading which has been documents and letters and journals, essentially. Oral histories, regardless of what was left out, can be just as accurate as a written document. -Kelly W. | ||
I agree with Sarah's point. I thought this was a novel when I first started reading. A disclaimer would have been nice. But even knowing it's her own stories, what do we make of the sources? How representative are the vignettes? --Amanda | I agree with Sarah's point. I thought this was a novel when I first started reading. A disclaimer would have been nice. But even knowing it's her own stories, what do we make of the sources? How representative are the vignettes? --Amanda | ||
