|View single post by booklover|
|Posted: Tue Mar 18th, 2008 07:42 pm||
I mean no disrespect to you, because you are a bright young woman. And I also realize that you are only 14, so you are still in the process of developing your intellectual ability, but I feel I have to say this. If you approach your study of history when you enter college the same way you do now, I doubt you will make it. When you argue a point, or bring up a topic that means something to you, no one here will argue that it isn't valid. Rather, we will discuss it in the context it deserves. I'm not offended by what you wrote (nor did I ever mean to give that suggestion) but to just blindly post something without studying it or looking at it seriously only serves to promote misunderstanding and misinformation.
Your point that Nathan Bedford Forrest wasn't a bigot or racist deserves serious study. However, just because you say it doesn't make it so (nor does my saying it is wrong make me right). We can discuss the pros and cons of each side and you can present evidence for your point and I will present evidence for my point. In the end, I doubt we would change each other's minds, but if done in the spirit of scholarly endeavor, hopefully the discussion will advance our understanding of the subject.
Dixie, I may seem like I'm preaching to you, but I've studied history seriously for 36 years now (yes, I started when I was 8), and there is a right way and a wrong way to do it. If you sincerely want to study history for the rest of your life, I encourage you to do so. But don't get upset when we here who have done so for far much longer takes you to task when you do or say something that needs corrected. It's like when a comment was made about proofing your posts...it may seem as nit-picking, but people will take you seriously (or will not) based on how you present yourself. I wrote for a living for 14 years, and while my grammarian skills always need help, I never published anything (or post anything now) that I didn't read at least twice. It's just habit, but one that everyone needs to acknowledge as important. Not being able to type doesn't mean you're unintelligent (I've known excellent writers who used the hunt and peck method exclusively), but not proofing what you write makes me take what you say less seriously. Maybe that's my own hang-up, but I doubt I'm the only one who believes that.
I wish you the best of luck in your future, and I hope you will accept this in the spirit in which it is intended. I want you to succeed, because I feel that if someone your age wants to study history that must be encouraged. But it must be encouraged in the right way.