Fake Heroes: Ten False Icons and How they Altered the Course of History

Product Information

The reason the Norwegians were (and still are) so good at polar travel is because it's where they live, they do it all the time, they learn to ski before they can walk. Nansen is a towering figure in Norway, and rightfully so (just don't Google his nudes). Amundsen will always be a polar hero, but he is not so highly regarded due to falling in with the likes of Mussolini and his big interest in The Fash during his later years. I'm unsure why the food taken on the expedition is mentioned at all - they needed enough supplies to last 65 men YEARS - of course they took a lot of food?!

According to English, anything Churchill did was mainly for the purposes of self-promotion. When Churchill achieved anything good, it apparently can be attributed to the influence of his wife. English gives as an example of this the social reforms Churchill introduced while at the Board of Trade. However, Churchill stated his support of social reform as early as 1899, five years before he even met Clementine. While campaigning in his first ever election, Churchill said: He has written extensively for Politico [3] and Byline Times, [4] and in 2021 published a non-fiction book, Fake History. [5] [6] Fake History looks at "the 10 biggest lies from history and... at the people who propagated them", [7] including the idea that the British royal family are German, or that Adolf Hitler was a failed artist. [8]For those uninitiated, Roland Huntford's 'Scott and Amundsen' is incredibly biased against Scott, and includes falsehoods that have been debunked since, some of which have been merrily repeated in Fake Heroes. *sigh* Szerintem nem érdemes azzal az előfeltételezéssel olvasni, hogy ez történelemtudomány. A történelemtudománynak (és minden tudománynak) ugyanis valahol feltétele, hogy az ember összegyűjti az adatokat, aztán levon belőlük valamilyen következtetést. Ha van is előzetes hipotézise, azért csak az adat az úr. Englishnek viszont van egy karcolhatatlan elképzelése arról, hogy a nacionalizmus hülyeség, a nemzetek története merő hazugsággyár, a Brit Birodalom pedig szégyellje össze magát. Amivel egy csomó ponton egyet is értek. Ebből kiindulva a szerző összegereblyézik mindenféle kis színest, elegyíti őket némi jópofáskodással*, egy kis csúsztatással, aztán az egész masszát áradó lendülettel az arcunkba tolja. Történelmi evidenciákat úgy ad elő, mintha azok egy általa felfedezett földrész partvidékei lennének, és úgy megy neki a nemzeti panteon legendáinak, mintha személyes sérelmeket akarna megtorolni rajtuk. Ez amúgy nem feltétlenül rossz - lehet ebből szórakoztató, sőt: intelligens kötetet építeni. Csak hát ez nem tudomány - sokkal inkább rokon a propagandával. De végtére is az is egy műfaj. English, Otto (2021). Fake History: Ten Great Lies and How They Shaped the World. London. ISBN 978-1-78739-639-5. OCLC 1246540717. {{ cite book}}: CS1 maint: location missing publisher ( link) The Climate Emergency Byline Times‘ coverage of the consequences of, and responses to, the climate crisis

The author's problem with Andy Warhol is somewhat unclear. I mean, we know that many of Warhol's works weren't actually physically produced by Warhol himself, so this is not really new information. There was never any sense in which Andy Warhol tried to claim otherwise, as his entire artistic life was about blurring the boundaries between consumerism and art. Nevertheless, Otto English doesn't like Warhol at all, which is understandable in some ways, but not comprehensively explained. Russian Interference Byline Times leads the way in exposing the anti-democratic influence of the Kremlin over the affairs of other nations In 2023, English published a follow-up book, Fake Heroes, in which he profiles ten historical figures and analyses myths connected to them. [9] He shows how our present continues to be manipulated by the fabrications of the past. By the end the reader realises that how so much of what we take to be historical fact is, in fact, fiction.

There are flaws in his writing. For example in the JFK chapter he sometimes use JFK and Kennedy interchangeably making it difficult to discern who he meant. Also you will find stories of other characters threw in for not so obvious reason. This book has the grammar of a well written text. No references were to be found and the content strayed wildly from what the chapter titles were. I felt like I was just reading someone’s opinion piece the whole time, I know that’s what all history books are, but if you don’t reference things how do I know that what you’re saying is correct and the history you’re calling fake isn’t. A quote from Cherry-Garrard is then cut down to make Scott appear hopeless and emotional, the full quote being "He [Scott] cried more easily than any man I have ever known. What pulled Scott through was character, sheer good grain which ran over and under and through his weaker self and clamped it all together." We only get the bit about him crying. Ráadásul ezzel dédelgetjük azoknak a lelkét is, akik velünk értenek egyet - hisz valójában mi is azt szeretjük a legjobban, ha ki van mondva nyíltan, hogy az "ők" és a "hülyék" tulajdonképpen szinonimák. Ettől valahogy jobban érezzük magunkat.