I share both your disdain for textbooks in general and your desire to limit their use in a homeschool setting. I don't, however, share your suggestion that William J. Bennetta's reviews of Joy Hakim's History of US should be given any weight whatsoever in making a decision about whether to use these books. I have been following the "controversy" around these books and their author for several years now, and after having read both TTL's articles and the books themselves, I've come to the conclusion that Mr./Dr. Bennetta, whoever he is, is just as much a quack as he would like us to believe Ms. Hakim is.
Here is a quote from his article "More Hokum from Hakim:"
Joy Hakim has spiked The First Americans with lots of multi-culti rubbish, and I recently have described, in these pages, one of her most repugnant stunts: Eagerly pandering to the multi-culti crowd, she promotes two different fables about when and how America originated, even though the two fables plainly contradict one another. I now shall consider some other feats of trickery that Hakim has performed in The First Americans, starting with her silk-and-skins shtick.
In one short paragraph, he employs the pejorative phrases "spiked," "multi-culti rubbish," "repugnant stunts," "eagerly pandering," "promotes. . . fables," "feats of trickery," and the word "shtick!" Frankly, that doesn't sound much like the work of anyone whose opinion I would value. In general, his rhetoric is so defensive and overheated as to be categorized as hysterical and therefore useless to me as an evaluation tool.
(Gina and I are friends off-blog and she originally sent her comments to me by email. This is what I wrote back.)
I don't, however, share your suggestion that William J. Bennetta's reviews of Joy Hakim's History of US should be given any weight whatsoever in making a decision about whether to use these books.
I don't think he should be given much weight either, in the case of the Hakim series, which is why I phrased it the way I did -- "whether or not you agree with him, it's worth considering". You can always consider, and spit out/disregard, which is what I did when I decided to use the books lol. But I know there are some readers who might be interested in what he has to say and might even agree, and for them it could be a useful resource.
Also, the essay about religion in the Hakim books, which I think is by another TTL writer, is a useful discussion because the subject comes up often about SOTW as well, with the author presenting biblical tales as fact. Though the point that he's trying make, that by presenting them as fact Hakim is using the book to promote her own religious beliefs -- in the volume on colonial America -- is a big stretch, to me. And the way he makes it, with that overheated and hysterical rhetoric you mention, is pretty much designed to lose more converts than it gains.
In general, his rhetoric is so defensive and overheated as to be categorized as hysterical, and therefore useless to me as an evaluation tool.
I tend to cut him some slack, because I think his brain must be a bit fried from slogging through all the publishers' drek out there. I like his ID stuff, especially his reviews on (I suppose that should be against) "Of Pandas and People," and also his essay on proper historical research; I can't remember the name of it, but it's under his "Good Publications for Teachers" section.
Gina, while writing my most recent blog entry this afternoon, I referred to a post from last summer, where I was reminded that I wrote, shades of William Bennetta, that "Joy Hakim's History of US is nice, but too long and too politically correct for a proper ripping yarn"!
On this, we agree. . . nice, but in no way a proper ripping yarn. Very funny!
Love this post! I couldn't agree more. I taught high school literature in Chicago in my past life and I never opened a text book. When whole books are available use them. Excerpts, generally, leave everyone wanting or waiting for more or even skew the ideas of the author leaving a misimpression of the times or writing style.
As for history, I do feel you sometimes need a foundation (maybe just a timeline) and we will be using Hakim's History of Us. If fact we used bits and pieces last year and this year.
wisteria -- I certainly agree that you need a foundation for some subjects, including history, but I don't know that the usual textbooks are the best option. I don't really consider Hakim's "History of US" -- which we're using ourselves, along with the SOTW series and Gombrich's Little History -- a standard textbook, since it's written by one author, and an author with a vision at that (she was mighty unhappy with what her son had been using, if I remember correctly).
What I really like is the Gombrich book, which I wrote about here,
http://farmschoolathome.blogspot...-
little_11.html
along with a list of other world histories for adults and kids; I just wish there was more of it. Or more like it, for that matter.
Thank you, I think I found a textbook.
I really liked your suggestion Growth of the American Republic by Henry Steele Commager, Samuel Eliot Morison, and William E. Leuchtenberg (volume I, volume II)
My eldest (17) is in college so I don't have to worry about him (we skipped American History altogether). Sean is 15 now and we are going to do World History next year so he will be 16 when we start American History. Usually by using AP books or college books I found satisfactory textbooks, but I was appalled at the lack of decent American History books.
I loved history when I was in school and had wonderful books and teachers.
Interesting post. Not only do living books help teach a child history, it draws them in and makes them feel a part of it. Textbooks can't do that.
-gena
www.TheHomeschoolMagazine.com
Commenting by HaloScan
