The Second Coming

[jimmy olsen]

I think this is an awesome lesson Grumbler, it's really creative and will make the students think.

[Caliga]

So jealous!

Oh, and it's James McPherson.

Whoops.   Anyway, he was totally cool... not at all arrogant which is a bit surprising given his stature.  Since he is a professor at Princeton, which was like 20 minutes from where I grew up, him coming to our class wasn't as big a deal as it might sound.

[Martinus]

Interesting. All of my teachers always mixed it up with their own and then stuff from previous exams. Maybe because they wanted to convince themselves that they weren't just teaching to an exam.

The strongest argument against the AP system is that it is, indeed, teaching to a test.  I happen to agree.  While I think the writing portion of the AP European History test is quite good, it is only half the exam.  The multiple-choice half is rightfully referred to by many AP Euro teachers as "the trivial pursuit portion of the test."

What is more, the MC portion takes only 50 minutes of the 195-minute test, and yet counts for half of the score.

It's funny how these things are - for example when I was at school, pretty much all tests were based on essay/written response. Now they are moving towards multiple choice since it is the "better, American method".

[grumbler]

It's funny how these things are - for example when I was at school, pretty much all tests were based on essay/written response. Now they are moving towards multiple choice since it is the "better, American method".

The more things change, the more they change for the worse! 

[Lettow77]

Covering WW1 in AP Euro right now. Its easy mode, and nothing needs to be studied compared to, say, the italian rennaisance, of which I remain deliberately ignorant.

What an evocative time in history- It pays, however, to remember that even while everyone laments the atrocious casualty rates, the Confederacy lost a greater portion of its men in arms than even WW1 France did.

Lost Generation indeed. The South produced some beautiful poems, by Ryan especially, but they recieve an unfortunately small amount of coverage.

[Caliga]

italian rennaisance, of which I remain deliberately ignorant.

Elaborate.

[jimmy olsen]

Italian Renaissance, of which I remain deliberately ignorant.

Elaborate.

Yeah, I was also confused by his antipathy to the Italian Renaissance. I don't see any direct connection to the perfidious Yankees.

[Lettow77]

There are things that interest me in history, which I study, and things I do not. I like the roman era, I like the dark ages, and I like Europe from the protestant reformation onward. But in between is a boring period that constitutes my worst subject. It doesnt help that coverage of it is oversaturated with knowledge about artists, scultpors and the like, which never made for very interesting history in my estimation.

If they were trying to make it more presentable, I'd like to see more on the mercenary armies of the small states, and the wheeling and deeling between each of them. Still, something about the whole era feels too progressive and decadent for me. It reminds me of yankees in a way I cannot explain, but recoil from.

[saskganesh]

italian rennaisance, of which I remain deliberately ignorant.

Elaborate.

Greeks. Gibbon had the same bias.

[Martinus]

It's lettow so I don't see why I even bother responding, but someone who claims he likes the Roman era, but dislikes Renaissance (which means literally the rebirth of the antic/Roman era after the dark ages) must be a retard beyond imagination.

[PDH]

Sadly, Lettow is right.  The Renaissance is mostly about Italian painters who are fags.

[Valmy]

There are things that interest me in history, which I study, and things I do not. I like the roman era, I like the dark ages, and I like Europe from the protestant reformation onward. But in between is a boring period that constitutes my worst subject. It doesnt help that coverage of it is oversaturated with knowledge about artists, scultpors and the like, which never made for very interesting history in my estimation.

If they were trying to make it more presentable, I'd like to see more on the mercenary armies of the small states, and the wheeling and deeling between each of them. Still, something about the whole era feels too progressive and decadent for me. It reminds me of yankees in a way I cannot explain, but recoil from.

You would like to see more from whom?  What are you babbling about?  Knowledge about the wars from 1200-1500 is easily and readily available.

Your laziness reminds me of all the worthless Southerners who dragged Texas into an unwinnable war to keep their slaves.  Do your own work you inbred assholes.

[Ed Anger]

Dark Valmy with a goatee is cool.

[Lettow77]

Martinus, I like the roman era, but hate romans. My sympathies and interest lies very much in gaul. Vercingetorix is my bishi.

Valmy: Your absolutely right. The problem being, the most interesting part of an uninteresting period still leaves me cold. The material I have read has focused on something I dont care about, and I dont care enough to poke for what I want. I read hours of history every week, but I spend at least five hours on 1861-1865 for every hour elsewhere, and a goodly portion of those are South-centric 1820-1860. Other periods of history are a less frequent subject, and usually they focus around an event of people that has arrested my attention. (WW1, the boers, the ainu, & etc would all qualify.)

[Sheilbh]

Martinus, I like the roman era, but hate romans. My sympathies and interest lies very much in gaul. Vercingetorix is my bishi.

Jesus.  What is your problem with civilisation?  Every time it shows even a hint of flourishing you seem to sympathise wholeheartedly with the romantic, barbaric fringe