Ed Said - History in the making

 

We learned recently that New Zealand history is to become a part of our school curriculum by 2022. Widespread discussion followed and rightly so. Somehow we have yet to graduate from the blame game of history. We are such a young country but we need to know about the past and accept it as best we can. 

In Europe, young Germans must learn the horrors of their Nazi past to understand who they are today. British history of ancient conquests, bloody battles, repressions and glorious victories is taught and accepted warts and all to preserve their significance. 

As time passes and, thanks to science we are becoming better equipped, there is significant evidence of pre-Maori inhabitants. None of us is ‘pure’ anything and even less so now than in the past given the ease with which we can criss-cross the globe. There are prominent names of tribal chiefs and leaders that will ever remain relevant, just as explorers Cook, Tasman and others will. 

Will this new teaching, for example, be pro-Maori to show how they were beaten down by the white explorers and the colonists? Alternatively, will it teach how Maori slaughtered, beheaded and ate other Maori and Moriori and claimed Stewart Island by conquest? There is ample evidence that says Chinese were among our earliest settlers. Indeed Maori DNA shows strong relationship to Asian roots. Which version will be taught?

There have been books written about the tyrannical rule Captain James Cook had over his crew and any passengers. Alternatively there have also been books written about his businesslike methodology, how he was feted by the queen for his seamanship, humility and humanity, the author adamant he was not at all like the aforementioned. Which version will be told?

According to one report historians, curriculum experts, iwi and mana whenua, Pacific communities, the education sector and school communities will be involved. So among these vested groups, there will no doubt be a range of voices adamant that certain aspects of our history are covered certain ways – so it will not be easy bringing all these differing views together. Or is the beauty of history that there is not one mass produced main message, but a lot of messages open to interpretation?

School should be about teaching us to think, rather than teaching us what to think. So if a compulsory history which includes a range of reflections on how our country has evolved, provokes thought, feeling and engagement from students, and challenges our already ingrained views, isn't that enough? Isn't that the job of history? History alone should decide who are the heroes and who are the villains.

After all, what is history but an echo of the past into the future but we need to remember that as an echo reverberates it becomes less clear though it is still dependent on each new generation to write a new chapter. That means us. 

Rob
Editor