I don’t really know how to describe why I down voted it. There just isn’t anything here to talk about or learn. I have no idea why anyone mentioned “Common Errors in History” and you didn’t provide a link, so I have no reason to care about it.
Even if I wanted to care, your points don’t hold much informative value:
English students in the mid-20th century learned a lot of history.
The examples you give mean nothing to me. I have no idea how important they are in English culture. And, anyway, if I read a pamphlet highlighting common errors in American textbooks I would not assume that every child would have remembered those facts.
The English are so very English.
I can replace this header with any nationality and it is still as valid. The point is interesting, but it isn’t given enough treatment that I can actually insert it into my beliefs about English history textbooks. This is the best of the three points.
History is simplified in order to assign blame and credit.
You spend two paragraphs on this point and each paragraph you argue against the point with the first sentence. So I read this as, “X may be true! But it may not. But it may! But it may not.”
All in all, the post seems to say, “I found a book because someone somewhere mentioned it for some reason and it wasn’t interesting.” It makes me wonder why it wasn’t a comment in response to the original mention.
I don’t really know how to describe why I down voted it. There just isn’t anything here to talk about or learn. I have no idea why anyone mentioned “Common Errors in History” and you didn’t provide a link, so I have no reason to care about it.
Even if I wanted to care, your points don’t hold much informative value:
The examples you give mean nothing to me. I have no idea how important they are in English culture. And, anyway, if I read a pamphlet highlighting common errors in American textbooks I would not assume that every child would have remembered those facts.
I can replace this header with any nationality and it is still as valid. The point is interesting, but it isn’t given enough treatment that I can actually insert it into my beliefs about English history textbooks. This is the best of the three points.
You spend two paragraphs on this point and each paragraph you argue against the point with the first sentence. So I read this as, “X may be true! But it may not. But it may! But it may not.”
All in all, the post seems to say, “I found a book because someone somewhere mentioned it for some reason and it wasn’t interesting.” It makes me wonder why it wasn’t a comment in response to the original mention.