Gerald L. Andriole
Urologist combats prostatic diseases
|
Gerald L. Andriole Urologist combats prostatic diseases |
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
 |
|
History lesson
Ambrose blurred line between fact, fiction, student discovers By Andy Clendennen Do the ends really justify the means? That is, if historians commit factual errors and present other writer's works as their own, what is ultimately achieved?
But University senior Lara Marks knew of this long ago. As part of the requirements for her 1999 freshman Hewlett American Culture Studies class on Lewis and Clark, Marks found that Stephen Ambrose, one of America's pre-eminent historians, had blurred the line between fact and fiction on several occasions, in part to provide a better read. She also uncovered instances of plagiarism in Ambrose's best-selling Undaunted Courage, which chronicles the expedition of Lewis and Clark. "The original project was to rewrite or write a new chapter," Marks said, "so each student would take a particular scene or stories within the chapter and fill in the missing parts, or add things. "I wanted to focus more broadly on what I thought was really wrong with the book, so I decided to write a preface. I was writing a new chapter as sort of a disclaimer for what was to follow." This was one of the earlier discoveries of Ambrose's indiscrections but the fact remained quiet for nearly three years. Then, when additional allegations against Ambrose surfaced in the past two months, Marks -- a history and American culture studies double major in Arts & Sciences -- went public with her findings. "I think in academic circles, people questioned him before this," Marks said. "But I have no idea what made it blow up this time. Maybe he's become more popular, since the number of books he's written in the past couple of years is tremendous." Indeed. Ambrose now has 34 books to his name, and another is forthcoming. But none has been as popular -- and perhaps as maligned -- as his Lewis and Clark tome, the focus of a course taught by David Konig, professor of history in Arts & Sciences. "The whole purpose of the course was to get people to think critically about the writing of history," said Konig, who also had suspicions about the authenticity of the book. "I had every student take a different chapter of the book and read the footnotes and the primary source journals for that particular chapter." Konig added, "The purpose was twofold. To see how accurate it was in a factual sense, but also in an interpretive sense, and even in a sense of how scholarship draws on other scholarship and what creativity in the writing of history really means." Undaunted Courage remains the only book by Ambrose that Marks has read. But she has a shelf full of his words from her summer 2000 internship at the Eisenhower Center for American Studies, which Ambrose founded, in New Orleans -- Marks' hometown. She said she doesn't really have any plans to delve into another one of his works any time soon. "I lost some respect for Ambrose that I had before I really understood the way he worked and the way he wrote," she said. "I think if I did read any more of his books that it would be to look for what was wrong with them and not necessarily to enjoy them." Ambrose's response has been a sense of denial. He put up a two-paragraph statement on his Web site in his defense, and a statement released by his office quoted him as saying "people use the word 'plagiarism' much too quickly." Not so, say Marks and Konig. "It is a big deal, because plagiarism strictly speaking is claiming that something is your original composition," Konig said. "We are very strict about that in the sense that if you attribute without quotation marks, you are saying, 'I got this information from so-and-so, but it's in my words'. And one of the great claims of the popularizers of history is that they take the work of academic historians and they then synthesize it and write it in an easily accessible, readable form. "And what we have here is someone who is claiming to make it readable and is using someone else's readability. To claim that one is putting into one's own words and making it more presentable to the reading public is just not true." Although Marks might not agree with Ambrose's methods, she said there is a place for his style of writing -- as long as people are made aware of what they are reading. "I think it's very important to bring history to the people and present it in a manner that is entertaining for people to read and learn about American history," she said. "But it needs to be done in an accurate manner, and if anything, I really hope that Ambrose, whatever he says in his defense, is taking these criticisms into account before going to write his next book. "I think it's fine if Ambrose wants to write a kind of book that's more of an adventure story than straight history. I just think that people should be aware that that's what they are reading.". |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
