Guest column today by Victor Lungs, inadvertent world breath-holding champion and retired mouthpiece gumshoe:
In developing a view of history that may take into account various non-historical events and suppositions, one must first reconcile the historians' view of history with more modern attitudes as well as the opposite of fact. 'The Opposite Of Fact' is, of course, the treatise my mentor and eighth grade phys ed teacher, Coach Kuenzi, authored to get himself out of grad school, and it worked. While the School Board of Lawrence, Kansas, may not have appreciated it, a budding group of cynical - or shall I say skeptical - young anti-historians took note, and in fact wrote so many notes on the treatise itself that its original meaning has been literally obscured.
This afternoon I'd like to not only take advantage of the lovely divan in the back room for a nice, healthy nap, but also to discuss my latest 'anti-theory' of history, which is called, sheepishly, 'History Curves.' This form of historical research involves a small number of steps to get at not the truth of any historical personage or event, but whatever feels right in the historian's life at the moment, with or without alcohol. There are three simple steps:
1) Who what where are you studying?
2) Ugh, don't read any books articles papers about it!
3) What do you want to say? Say it! Say it loud!
Immediately this should be distanced and utterly separated from the modern conservative 'interpretation' of history that skews to their own political or social agenda. For example, a textbook at a charter school in San Antonio, Texas, states:
'George Washington hated homosexuals and would never ever let them ruin the sacred institution of marriage. Also, he didn't own slaves, he owned servants. Did we mention that he also hated Social Security? He would be sad to know you don't vote for Tea Party candidates. Do you really want to make the Father of our country sad?'
(Shockingly, this is from a high school textbook.)
An historian writing with the view of history called 'History Curves' would instead write about George Washington thus:
'All I can think about is his teeth. It would be weird talking to someone with wooden teeth. I think he would be a commanding presence, but only if you were in his army. Then he'd just be bossy. They drank a lot back then, I think, so I'd probably fill up on rum and challenge the dude to an arm wrestling contest and try to make his teeth pop out while we were struggling. I wouldn't care that it would embarrass the office of the Presidency. I'll challenge anyone anywhere to arm wrestling. Have you seen my biceps? Damn right.'
I understand that this theory needs a lot of work. Information and entertainment are difficult bedfellows but some of us are uncomfortable working in bed. Some of us, in fact, hate sleeping in bed, and prefer city buses or, if in Europe, trains.
Already the 'History Curves' school - it's more like a pre-school - has a few adherents, and hopes, once it makes enough noise, to have many more detractors. It's an exciting time to be a theorist, because there's virtually no oversight, and there's less and less money for academia, which means you can shop yourself to corporations, which I am of course doing.
Thank you for this soapbox on which to expound, and I hope someday you will be my friends and not just people I stalk without you ever finding out.
