Historians sometimes forget that history is continually being made and experienced before it is studied, interpreted, and read. These latter activities have their own history, of course, which may impinge in unexpected ways on public events. It is difficult to predict when “new pasts” will overturn established historical interpretations and change the course of history.
In the fall of 1954, for example, C. Vann Woodward delivered a lecture series at the University of Virginia which challenged the prevailing dogma concerning the history, continuity, and uniformity of racial segregation in the South. He argued that the Jim Crow (Jim Crow: n. 〈贬〉黑人) laws of the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries not only codified traditional practice but also were a determined effort to erase the considerable progress made by Black people during and after Reconstruction in the 1870’s. This revisionist view of Jim Crow legislation grew in part from the research that Woodward had done for the NAACP legal campaign during its preparation for Brown v. Board of Education. The Supreme Court had issued its ruling in this epochal desegregation case a few months before Woodward’s lectures.
The lectures were soon published as a book, The Strange Career of Jim Crow. Ten years later, in a preface to the second revised edition, Woodward confessed with ironic modesty that the first edition “had begun to suffer under some of the handicaps that might be expected in a history of the American Revolution published in 1776.” That was a bit like hearing Thomas Paine apologize for the timing of his pamphlet Common Sense, which had a comparable impact. Although Common Sense also had a mass readership, Paine had intended to reach and inspire: he was not a historian, and thus not concerned with accuracy or the dangers of historical anachronism. Yet, like Paine, Woodward had an unerring sense of the revolutionary moment, and of how historical evidence could undermine the mythological tradition that was crushing the dreams of new social possibilities. Martin Luther King, Jr., testified to the profound effect of The Strange Career of Jim Crow on the civil rights movement by praising the book and quoting it frequently.
2. It can be inferred from the passage that the “prevailing dogma” (line 10) held that
(A) Jim Crow laws were passed to give legal status to well-established discriminatory practices in the South
(B) Jim Crow laws were passed to establish order and uniformity in the discriminatory practices of different southern states
(C) Jim Crow laws were passed to erase the social gains that Black people had achieved since Reconstruction
(D) the continuity of racial segregation in the South was disrupted by passage of Jim Crow laws（D）
(E) the Jim Crow laws of the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries were passed to reverse the effect of earlier Jim Crow laws
看过前辈对此题的分析, 还是觉得无法接受答案是D.
http://forum.chasedream.com/dispbbs.asp?BoardID=25&ID=46272
题目问prevailing dagma, 那就是CVW的见解取非，感觉dogma不应该是D, 而应该和D的意思相反.
请NN指点.
引用weiyu的话，我同意他的观点。
我明白了, 也就是说大众认为JC破坏了种族隔离. 而CVW却认为是合法话了.
谢谢wangyu班主.
| 欢迎光临 ChaseDream (https://forum.chasedream.com/) | Powered by Discuz! X3.3 |