Hugh Cunningham, Reaction Paper Example

A piece of nonfiction I chose for analysis is an abstract from the article by Hugh Cunningham in which the author gives a review of the different branches and achievements of the history of childhood since its emergence as a science in the middle of the twentieth century. One of the first scholars to write about the experience of being a child in medieval Europe was Philippe Ariès. Many other followed not only to support but also to argue with him. Hugh Cunningham reviews the long argument which has largely become the backbone of the history of childhood. Doing justice to Ariès, Cunningham is quite uncritical of what is perceived as his mistake, but praises every attempt to break out from his legacy and make some independent attempt in the history of childhood. He sounds very appreciative particularly of Karin Calvert’s work. The exact wording is: “it is one of the strengths of Calvert’s book”. He also shows trust in Calvert’s book by writing “Calvert shows” or “Calvert demonstrates”. He does not question her study. In contrast, he criticizes Ariès’ work:

“Ariès’ account of the evolution of attitudes toward childhood draws to a close in the late seventeenth century: it is as though at that point he can discern a clear road that leads to the mid-twentieth century”. Cunningham clearly states the improbability of Ariès’ supposition.

What I like about Cunningham’s style is that he is really gentle in wording and does not seem to make rash decisions. At the same time, he clearly expresses his preferences. For instance, he thinks that it is the right thing to go further in studying the question instead of arguing with Ariès and he does not begrudge praise for anyone who does it.

I think that my subjectivity that I strive to control not to let it hinder my analytical powers is what is sometimes called female view of historic events. I am a strong believer in the notion of the absence of justification for any violence. Of course, the notion is not restricted to women, it is what is generally considered humane. Still, I hold the opinion that this view is inherent in the nature of womanhood. The problem with my subjectivity is that I constantly risk losing my standpoint in situations where “everyone is to blame”, which are characteristic of complex historic processes leading to grave consequences such as wars. Although I am perfectly aware of the fact that my opposition to any form of violence is a result of my more or less protected and untroubled existence (I am fortunate to have never been personally affected by military aggression and to enjoy the rights of a citizen of a developed country), I often fail to understand the vindictive nature of violence on national level. For example, although I perceive the history of Germany throughout the nineteenth and the beginning of twentieth century as deeply tragic, I cannot make myself agree with the opinion that the emergence of fascism as a response to it was logical and quite consistent with human nature.

However, I can expect some of my prospective students to be ready to explain the emergence of fascism by the humiliation Germany had been through. It is my task to first of all listen to their point. In my opinion, teachers must not stifle students’ initiative. It is my mission as a History teacher to give my students extensive information on the history of the mankind and to make them learn a number of key dates and events. But it is even more important to teach them critical thinking, learning and analytical skills and to whet their curiosity for history. They should not be just parroting information without thinking it over or holding anyone including me for an undisputed authority. An overbearing teacher can make a mistake of punishing the students who have the courage to argue with them thus giving the students a feeling that they had better bitten their tongues and stifling their creativity. However, a teacher should not let the students confuse the concept the teacher believes to be true. A good idea would be to read different sources on the subject one is teaching beforehand. During this preparation period the teacher is likely to encounter different arguments that he or she might hear in class and to get ready with counter arguments if necessary.

References

Cunningham, H. (1998). Histories of Childhood. The American Historical Review, Vol. 103, No. 4, p. 1200