Having recently read 10 Ways to Destroy the Imagination of Your Child by Anthony Esolen, and having read a good portion of “Hero Tales of American History” by some guy and Teddy Roosevelt (including the sections on George Washington–read it here) I was attuned to notice the following in our paper.
There is an exhibit at the Minnesota History Center entitled “Discover the Real George Washington” and the article covering it prominently featured the only complete set of George Washington’s dentures in existence. In fact, almost nothing but the teeth was discussed in the article. Why so? The articles explains:
The historians wanted to include the teeth in the exhibit because they offer a connection to the man behind the history.
When you see how uncomfortable the dentures were, “it’s very easy to relate to him on a human level,” Cadou said. “And relating to someone on that level provides insights into them that studying his accomplishments can’t.”
It is INSIGHT we are after, of course! And uncomfortable dentures are the ticket. I wish they would also include the small section of door that was dented when Washington stubbed his toe on it. Then there would be a real connection! I have stubbed my toe too! Oh the intimacy I feel with George Washington! We have both stubbed our toes! He is just like me! I know what it is like to be him! “History” has truly come alive for me today!
Don’t tell me about Washington’s so-called “accomplishments”–what are they to me? How can I relate to them? Have I been in a war? Have I president? No. Then don’t bother me with such trivialities. What unites mankind–what constitutes the universal “human level”–is such things as bodily discomfort and hygiene.
Sarcasm aside, it is a deeply false understanding of the “human level” that appears to me to underly this whole approach to “history”. First, there is an inability to draw out universal situations from particular situations. Certainly I will never face invading British forces, but may I face some challenge, possibly with the help of an unorganized and immature force, against an organized and seasoned superior force? Maybe. How do I stand up to Washington given the commonality of those situations? Probably very poorly. He is not a man just like I am, he was a great man.
A second reason for this misunderstanding of the “human level” might be that someone has lived such a superficial life, they really have nothing in their experience common with Washington aside from such trivialities as toe stubbing. If you live your life in front of a TV, you don’t have much in common with Washington. So maybe it would make you feel temporarily better to ignore his “accomplishments” (like almost singlehandedly achieving victory for the American revolution) and focus on his “human level” aka bare bodily existence–for at least one can have THAT in common with him. And you can pat yourself on the back for being nearly a twin of George Washington himself. Of course it would make you “feel better” truly if you saw yourself in light of Washington in his true humanity, felt ashamed at your self-elected moral retardation, repented, and strove to emulate Washington or others. But that doesn’t “feel good” according to many.
So maybe the point can be put simply by distinguishing two completely different meanings of “human level”–one means mere bodily existence, which all have in common and makes me no different than Jesus. This eliminates all moral accomplishment, virtue, strength of character, and anything worth thinking about, and simultaneously reinforces and justifies me in my current state. The other means at the deepest level, at the level of what matters most in which there are vast differences between those who share bodily life in common. This level reveals differences, requires insight to see the human commonalities of historically diverse situation so as to bridge the span of time. There is nothing new under the sun says King Solomon, yet it takes some insight to see that, and to appreciate someone’s facing of situations difficult to understand and unlikely to ever face oneself. It takes even more insight to learn from their dealing with that situation in order to deal with one’s own situation better, etc.
In sum, is the “human level” the surface of life, or the fundamentals of life?
I am going to the exhibit because I am sure there will be something of value there (if only to see his teeth! –not to smirk at and say ha ha that must have been uncomfortable, but to say wow those teeth have been worn by such a man), and also for my own curiosity of how it is set up and how kids there behave.
Appendix
Ok I just skimmed the article again after writing the above and realize I hadn’t yet come to full grips with how stupid stupid stupid the article and whole approach are. Consider the following
The dentures are more than just a novelty.
Ok, thank you. Please tell me there is some serious historical understanding to be gained from the dentures besides the fact that Washington might have been uncomfortable while wearing them. Please let this line indicate a turn away from trivialities and into the deeper things that unites mankind across time and circumstance.
With them and other personal items, including Washington’s glasses and clothing, historians were able to use computer programs to create what they believe to be spot-on full-size recreations of him.
You do not fail to disappoint. Not only do we now know he had uncomfortable teeth, we know exactly the shape of his jaw, and the protrusion of his nose. Now we are truly getting somewhere. After all, to understand George Washington is to see a waxen facsimile of his body (made with the aid of computers, to boot!). The full “human level” of Washington is now on display in Minneapolis, no need to look elsewhere.
