Charlotte Mason gave Van Loons Story of Mankind a favorable review, but some reviewers have criticized the book as being historically inaccurate. Is that because Van Loon isn politically correct, or are there real errors in the book?
Wendi’s Response: I am not really sure exactly what people who complain about Van Loon are talking about when they talk about historical errors. This complaint is also found in reviews of An Island Story, with the same lack of detail. Unless a reviewer cites specific instances where they disagree with the coverage of an event, then it is my personal policy to place that review in the realm of personal opinion very possibly informed by a personal agenda which the reviewer wishes to keep hidden. It might be that I share that agenda or starting assumption, but as long as the reviewer isn’t sharing it, I can’t tell. In such situations, that review is of negligable use. When reviewers complain about historical inaccuracy without specifying what exactly is inaccurate, I have to wonder why. They might be of one political persuasion, and Van Loon another, or they might believe that the South should have won the American Civil War/War Between the States and Van Loon doesn’t, or they might love
Related Questions
- Charlotte Mason gave Van Loons Story of Mankind a favorable review, but some reviewers have criticized the book as being historically inaccurate. Is that because Van Loon isn politically correct, or are there real errors in the book?
- Maybe Charlotte Mason gave Vans Loons book a postive review because she herself wasn a creationist?
- Can I upload a screenplay, short story, book or play without attaching a Review Eligibility Test?
