Dec 7, 1941

Let'sgoflying!

Touchdown! Greaser!
Joined
Feb 23, 2005
Messages
20,264
Location
west Texas
Display Name

Display name:
Dave Taylor
Asked a 28-yo employee the significance of this date.
Did ok but not quite as complete an answer as hoped for.
 
Ask a 60-year-old the significance of August 24th, 1814.

Time marches on, and people who have even a tenuous connection with a given historical event get fewer and fewer. Thus memories of events tend to fade. It's the way life works.

The exception to this is the military, which maintains battle honors to keep its history fresh. This tends to rub off on those who have served.

Ron Wanttaja
 
''December 7th, 1941 -- a date which will live in infamy'' will one day be only known to historians and a few die hard folks.

I mean who remembers March 6, 1836 outside of Texas.??
 
For reference, there are kids graduating high school today with no recollection of 9/11 beyond what they read in the history books or see in documentaries.
 
We had a contingent of Japanese computer execs show up in our office on December 7 a few years ago. I had to warn my ex-marine marketing guy to please try to avoid bringing up Pearl Harbor during the conversation. Normally, I'd get memos on this from him that start with "If you can't stand the heat, stay out of Nagasaki" and the like.
 
My Uncle Leon never let us forget. He was an Ensign on the Arizona. At sundown on December 7 he rowed out to his ship and lowered the flag. I have a print of the picture by Tom Freeman. His name is etched on one of the stones encircling the Arizona anchor.
 
I made a doctor appointment for today last week. When the scheduler said the date, I said “ah, Pearl Harbor” and she just looked at me like I was speaking Japanese.
 
For reference, there are kids graduating high school today with no recollection of 9/11 beyond what they read in the history books or see in documentaries.

Yep. One day I'll be the old codger who remembers that. Who am I kidding, I'm already that old codger.

Time marches on, and people who have even a tenuous connection with a given historical event get fewer and fewer. Thus memories of events tend to fade. It's the way life works.

Very true. Plus relations change over time, borders change. Taking Germany and Japan as examples, I imagine few believed in the early days of 1942 that we would ever have good relations with those countries. Yet today, our relations are quite good. Go back further and those in the late 1700s I doubt would ever have thought that we would have good relations with England. Nothing on this Earth is truly permanent, not even continents. Certainly not boundaries or policies.

With few exceptions, we are ultimately all forgotten one day. "The final death."
 
''December 7th, 1941 -- a date which will live in infamy'' will one day be only known to historians and a few die hard folks.

I mean who remembers March 6, 1836 outside of Texas.??

I prefer April 21, 1836. The "battle" of San Jacinto. We got revenge for the Texians lost in Goliad. "Come And Take It!"
 
The tusks which clashed in mighty brawls
Of mastodons, are billiard balls.

The sword of Charlemagne the Just
Is Ferric Oxide, known as rust.

The grizzly bear, whose potent hug,
Was feared by all, is now a rug.

Great Caesar's bust is on the shelf,
And I don't feel so well myself.


Arthur Guiterman

Ron Wanttaja
 
Ask a 60-year-old the significance of August 24th, 1814.

There is a very major difference between not knowing/remembering and never being taught in the first place... I'm afraid that is where we are today... Our history, especially if it doesn't conform to the PC crowd, has no place in the classroom anymore.
 
There is a very major difference between not knowing/remembering and never being taught in the first place... I'm afraid that is where we are today... Our history, especially if it doesn't conform to the PC crowd, has no place in the classroom anymore.

As time marches on and there is an increasing amount of history to teach (that amount can only go up), decisions have to be made about what to teach. My wife and I were talking about the differences in what she was taught (in small town Nebraska) vs. what I was taught in NYC private school and then public high school. For her it was a lot more US-focused history, where for me it was a lot more world history, and getting even to WW2 and later was at the very end. Much more focus on the distant past than the recent, although when the Berlin Wall fell we did listen to coverage of that on the radio.

I think some of the thought process in New York was that we had relatives alive who remembered the more modern events and would tell us first hand. That may have been true, and we did have some of that. I wish my grandmother had told me more about her memories of WWII, but my mom told me some about what my grandmother had told her, and some memories from her childhood (she was born a few days after D-Day).

Which history should be prioritized, that's up for debate.
 
@Ted DuPuis
Sounds about right... I went to NYC public schools from 1961 to 1973... We got an ear full of US/American history... A little world history... Don't remember specifically covering WWII but like you said... I had a lot of uncles that fought in that one...
 
Which history should be prioritized, that's up for debate.
Part of the problem, I think, is that students today are getting history through too many filters. Rather than returning to primary sources, they are hearing through teachers, commentators and editors that theirs is the only rational, moral, ethical generation in history; that all who came before were racist, sexist, superstitious morons and villains, whose words are not worthy of the time to consider them.

As the Soviet-era Russian joke said, "The future is certain. It's the past that keeps changing."
 
For her it was a lot more US-focused history, where for me it was a lot more world history, and getting even to WW2 and later was at the very end.

Ours was world history, and ended around WW2, mainly because the books were just that old!
 
Part of the problem, I think, is that students today are getting history through too many filters. Rather than returning to primary sources, they are hearing through teachers, commentators and editors that theirs is the only rational, moral, ethical generation in history; that all who came before were racist, sexist, superstitious morons and villains, whose words are not worthy of the time to consider them.

As the Soviet-era Russian joke said, "The future is certain. It's the past that keeps changing."

One challenge is that there aren't many people left who fought in WWII. When I was a kid, I knew older men in the community who fought in the war - Army, Navy, Marines, etc. I knew two gentlemen who survived the Bataan Death March. You couldn't swing a cat without it hitting a new WWII movie or book.

We're far enough removed today that the heroics of WWII have been replaced by the latest tragedy to befall the Kardashians.
 
I went to New Jersey public schools in the 1960s and 70s. I'm pretty sure we learned predominantly about US history, and very little about world history.

History is always taught through "filters". The act of deciding what events to study introduces a filter, not to mention the various viewpoints that surround an event. There's no such thing as unbiased history.
 
Our neighbor Hilda has a different memory of WWII, she is old country German, She once told me that every young man in her high school was killed, Her husband was 14 when the brown shirts came and took him away. he once told me he had a choice, be killed or go with them. he said he and his group were hiding in a ditch, when the American troops saved him.

Very interesting to listen to their stories.
 
Our neighbor Hilda has a different memory of WWII, she is old country German, She once told me that every young man in her high school was killed, Her husband was 14 when the brown shirts came and took him away. he once told me he had a choice, be killed or go with them. he said he and his group were hiding in a ditch, when the American troops saved him.

Very interesting to listen to their stories.

As a kid back in the mid 60s I remember a really friendly, nice man on the block. I thought he was old at probably mid to late 30s. His wife didn't come outside much but her husband was always outside. He was always working in the yard and he would help us work on our bicycles and wagons. One thing I remember about both of them was the numbers tattooed on their left arm. They survived Auschwitz concentration complex as children. Must have had some really bad memories as the only ones to receive tattoos were not immediately led to the gas chambers but were usually put to forced work. I can only imagine what they went through as children.
 
About 1950 +- the farm next to us was bought by a Checo-slovack couple named "Imp" kids around the hood had fun with that. but when "Paul took sick my dad flew him out to get better medical help. I remember he had a tattoo of a number on his arm.
 
The Spencer Air Car designer died in the mid 1990s, I believe. His dad was the Spencer rifle inventor - if you were around in 1990 or so, you could have talked to a guy whose father had known Lincoln. Cool, quite a span. . .

Then again, when I was a kid in the 60s, just about any adult male older than mid-late 30s was a likely a WWII vet. Now most of those guys are gone.
 
I agree with @Everskyward that you always have a filter on history. Even if I tell my story of September 11th, 2001 as someone who was there, it was my view, only of being on the ground in New York. DC and Flight 93 I rarely even think about. That’s a filter.
 
We occasionally get tidbits about what some of our high school teachers did during WW II ( I graduated in 1970 ). We sure didn't hear that while we were in school. Some were downright heroes "back in the day". We had a repairman in a local appliance store who was a flight engineer on B-17s out of England. Spent time as a guest of the Germans when the plane he was on (not their regular one) got shot down. Told me about a problem they had with their regular plane and found out after the war that someone had figured it out. Left me to figure it out myself. Seems they had to ditch one bomb to lighten up the plane enough to keep up with everyone else. I can think of some things today that might have caused that, but I would sure liked to have heard from him what the actual reason was.

Our elders survived some hair raising events in their day. Too bad most of it is lost with them.
 
I remember yesterday like it was...……….. ok fine, I just remember a coupl'a things here and there.
 
Part of the problem, I think, is that students today are getting history through too many filters. Rather than returning to primary sources, they are hearing through teachers, commentators and editors that theirs is the only rational, moral, ethical generation in history; that all who came before were racist, sexist, superstitious morons and villains, whose words are not worthy of the time to consider them.

As the Soviet-era Russian joke said, "The future is certain. It's the past that keeps changing."
What do you consider a primary source? I ask only because to me, it would be the letters written by people, the photographs taken (if any), and documents by the people involved. Even so, those may lend a different view from what actually happened- the "Rashomon effect".
 
What do you consider a primary source? I ask only because to me, it would be the letters written by people, the photographs taken (if any), and documents by the people involved.
Exactly. First-hand witnesses contradict each other in court, too. But we still consider what they have to say and make up our minds, rather than throwing them all out and depending solely on an elitist "expert", bringing his own layer of bias and prejudice, to tell us what the witnesses' thoughts, perceptions and agendas really were.
 
Ask a 60-year-old the significance of August 24th, 1814.

Not really a date of the same significance. British troops burning DC in the course of a minor war is not the same as a sneak attack bringing the US into a World War. Plus it isn’t something that happened in a single day, it happened over several days.

Some dates are not know through mere ignorance.
 
Not really a date of the same significance.
Again, it depends on ones' frame of reference...a date 200+ years ago vs. less than 80 years back, with some participants still living. In the year 2140, Pearl Harbor may be looked on as a date of no great significance. WWII had been under way for ten years at that point, according to some historians.

I'm somewhat of a War of 1812 buff, so I'd look at the burning of Washington as a bit more significant. Traditionally, wars were over once you occupied the enemy's capital.

I did pick another date first, though, but picked the burning of Washington as being a bit more obscure. I originally picked January 8, 1815. Much more famous.

Ron Wanttaja
 
Exactly. First-hand witnesses contradict each other in court, too. But we still consider what they have to say and make up our minds, rather than throwing them all out and depending solely on an elitist "expert", bringing his own layer of bias and prejudice, to tell us what the witnesses' thoughts, perceptions and agendas really were.
How would you choose, for something as vast as, say, the civil war? Reconstruction? Were the events of January 8, 1815 an attempt at uti possidetis by the United Kingdom? (for @wanttaja )

I'm not disagreeing with your premise, it just seems a little impractical.

The second sentence in the quoted part....Some people do- The "elitist experts" are called "lawyers"
 
fdr.png
 
...Were the events of January 8, 1815 an attempt at uti possidetis by the United Kingdom? (for @wanttaja )

I wouldn't classify it as such, because neither party was aware a treaty had been signed three weeks earlier. I believe the Treaty of Ghent had the usual clauses regarding the timing of the effectiveness; a British victory would have allowed them to legally retain the territory.

IIRC, there was an American warship in the Pacific, capturing British whalers until mid-1815. The captures were legal by the treaty, as it was still in the time span allowed for news to spread.

Ron Wanttaja
 
Ask a 60-year-old the significance of August 24th, 1814.

I'm 60. And based upon the topic of this thread and knowing the general timeline of the War of 1812, I guessed that it was when the Brits burned the White House. A quick Google search proved me correct. But if you had asked the question the other way around "On what date did the British burn the White House", I could not have told you. Still, I feel that my knowledge on the matter is sufficient and serves me well. I know the war happened, I know basically when, and I know that the White House was burned down during the war. If I need more precise info on the war or an event during the war, I can look it up. I think that is what really matters when it comes to history. Likewise, while I know the significance of June 6, 1944, I'd be happy that a young person just knows that D-Day was the day of the Allied landings in France during WW2. It would not bother me if they didn't know the date. I think we place too much emphasis on the wrong things at times.
 
Back
Top