Warning: Undefined variable $num in /home/shroutdo/public_html/courses/wp-content/plugins/single-categories/single_categories.php on line 126
Warning: Undefined variable $posts_num in /home/shroutdo/public_html/courses/wp-content/plugins/single-categories/single_categories.php on line 127
As Craig Offman argues in his article, “A tempest around ‘Isaac’s Storm'”, Erik Larson’s Isaac’s Storm is not the most historically accurate novel to depict the events of the hurricane that hit Galveston, Texas in 1900. Although it is based on a real event, centering around real statistics and even real people, Offman points out that the aspect that Larson decides to play with is the interaction and relationship between the central characters. Whether or not Joseph and Isaac Cline were on bad terms, we will never be able to fully know. Larson confidently insists that his depiction of the brothers’ conflict was “dead on”, giving his side of the argument to combat Fincher’s argument that Larson had “overdramatized their relationship”. Although Larson says he did not purposely bend the truth, it can be assumed that the way in which he perceived the truth was very different than others. In analyzing sources, it is important to always consider how the author has understood the original, primary sources and how the author has decided to convey his or her perspectives into writing. As we have discussed many times in class, Larson’s perpective of the brothers’ relationship compared to Fincher and Offman’s does not discredit his reliability, as long as his claims are based on accurate, primary sources, and he is able to competently argue his argument. I was reminded once again as I was reading joshuadw88’s response, how important it is for us, as historians, to look at primary sources carefully in order to detect the bias or even inaccuracy in the writer’s intent (Trying to Reflect Reality). Whichever career path we have chosen, it is always important to look at sources with a critical eye to open our perspectives and form our own unique arguments and opinions. Personally, as an aspiring teacher of history, I need to be able to present multiple perspectives to my students, to help them understand this importance of perspective. Without perspective, history would be so flat and meaningless without opposing arguments and unique analyses… Without perspective, would history even be a field of study?