- Joined
- Apr 12, 2005
- Messages
- 18,984
- Reaction score
- 6,937
- Location
- At some altitude
- Website
- www.jamie-mason.com
I may be an irritable sort, but my daughter is coming home talking nonsense. She's in the first grade. A few weeks ago, the dinner table talk produced the point that Abraham Lincoln was a very happy man. I asked her about this and she was explaining that this is what they learned in class. In the middle of a civil war, I expect the President of the United States was quite stressed and sleep deprived.
Today I find out that "everyone liked Amelia Earhart." Why do I find this unlikely? She was a pushy broad (and good on her) so I imagine she had her detractors.
Is there not enough filler information to complete a lesson rather than fluffing up the stories with giddy non-facts? There is just something dopey about drawing a smiley face on every historical character they introduce. Now I'm not suggesting that every grim detail or mature conflict be explored in grammar school, but I think the gilding is a bit dishonest. I'll just have to spend extra time explaining that people "of note" put their pants on one leg at a time just like everyone else.
Perhaps I need to switch to decaf.
Today I find out that "everyone liked Amelia Earhart." Why do I find this unlikely? She was a pushy broad (and good on her) so I imagine she had her detractors.
Is there not enough filler information to complete a lesson rather than fluffing up the stories with giddy non-facts? There is just something dopey about drawing a smiley face on every historical character they introduce. Now I'm not suggesting that every grim detail or mature conflict be explored in grammar school, but I think the gilding is a bit dishonest. I'll just have to spend extra time explaining that people "of note" put their pants on one leg at a time just like everyone else.
Perhaps I need to switch to decaf.