Frances Fitzgerald, in her analytical essay “Rewriting American History” (1979), asserts that over the course of time, content in history books has evolved to “such an extent that even an adult would find the unrecognizable.” She supports her assertion by intermitting robust diction, utilizing convoluted syntax, and capitalizing on cogent anecdotal evidence. Fitzgerald’s purpose is to reveal the consequence of rewriting history and how it creates a “certain level of unpleasantness” to history schoolbook writers and publishers, teachers, and school districts in order to expound the struggle students must endure with the inconsistencies. She embraces an astute tone (“Even more surprising than the emergence of problems is the discovery that the great unity of the texts has broken.”) to accentuate to history textbook publishers and writers, teachers, and school districts that history textbooks need to be as objective, candid, and free from superfluous additions as possible with the production and teaching of them.
Appendix:
1. Rhetorical Strategy: Diction
Example(s):
a.
…show more content…
With the induction of contradictory words like vindictive to sincere and benevolent to rattletrap, Fitzgerald ingeminates the negative impact on constantly evolving history content to history textbook publishers and writers, teachers, and school districts. Content changes so that “The transient history is those children’s history forever—their particular version of America.” which is what Fitzgerald is criticizing. Words of power like deus ex machina, dodders, gloaming, and pious further emphasizes the severity of the failure that history textbooks will not completely fulfill the minds of students. This in turn appeals to the audience’s sense of pride knowing that the changes their responsible for with history textbooks has failed the young minds of