Making Latino History Attractive to the Young
Posted April 9th, 2009by Ilan Stavans
Turning the past into history is always fun. The effort isn’t a summation of what occurred at a particular time but what we think happened. In other words, the act of writing history is nothing more than interpretation. Making that interpretation appealing to readers is the dream of any historian. And even when the target audience doesn’t include the young, it goes without saying that it is the next generation that either endorses or rejects a particular interpretation.
It is urgent to make young readers in this country aware of the rich aspects of Latino history. Only in so do we advance the possibility of a more tolerant future. Too often our school textbooks ignore this past, reducing essential episodes to bullet-type captions, giving protagonists a mere nod, and silencing major themes without which it is impossible to appreciate how the United States became the diverse nation it is today. For instance, I recently reread a classic history of the Civil Rights era—one assigned for college courses nationwide. I looked to assess the role Latinos were allowed in the project. To my dismay, it was insignificant. Does this mean Latinos were passive during the period? Not at all. Evidence of their activism is enormous. It simply means that the interpretation of those historical events is incomplete. Or more accurately, biased.
One of the greatest tasks we face is how to make Latino history a fundamental component of the U.S. historical narrative. The single way to achieve this task is by inviting young readers to understand, reflect, and debate—in one word: to interpret—not only a slice of the collective past but, as my 12-year-old son puts it, the whole enchilada. Once we’re ready to do that, a series of questions become apparent: What is the greatest challenge posed by interesting the young in Latino history and culture, for one cannot exist without the other? What are the most prominent themes in Latino history and culture? And what is the ideal approach to pique interest in the subject? Should it be through a Great Books strategy, by emphasizing historical figures and political leaders, or in a bottom-up way?
Needless to say, such questions don’t have easy answers. I invite LAE users to share with me their divergent responses.
April 28th, 2009 at 3:15 pm
The absence of the Latino presence in U.S. history is an important conversation. It is a conversation that converts us into preachers standing at a NYC street corner crying out repent –with no one paying heed. The illustration is to point out that often teachers and professors have dismissed my explanations as to why Latinos made a difference in the development of our country; these well-intentioned educators have simply indicated that they don’t have time in the curriculum to go over lengthy matters dealing with Latinos. Not only that, I was recently surprised when a college professor told me that when she relocated to Texas she was “shocked” to see how new Texas was—meaning coming into existence only after the Alamo. To her, there was no such thing as Texas during the Spanish Empire or part of Mexico post-1821.
I love the idea of Great Books and will pitch in Great Films: Salt of the Earth, Cabeza de Vaca, Espaldas Mojadas, Angelitos Negros, etc.