# Yet another face from the past....



## j d worthington (Mar 8, 2008)

I don't believe I've ever seen a picture of Annie before (though I may have a very long time ago and forgotten), but in any event, this photo is a newly discovered one, and is a rather interesting study....

1888 photo depicts Helen Keller, teacher - Yahoo! News

Title: "1888 photo depicts Helen Keller, teacher", from AP, by Melissa Trujillo, datelined Thurs., Mar. 6, 2008.


----------



## littlemissattitude (Mar 8, 2008)

Thanks for that, j. d., even though I'd already seen this in the news.

When I was in about the fourth grade I read everything I could get my hands on about Helen Keller. Fascinating woman. Did you know that she was a Socialist?

Anyway, I'd bet that you probably have seen pictures of Annie before and just don't remember...there are a number of them around.


----------



## j d worthington (Mar 8, 2008)

littlemissattitude said:


> Thanks for that, j. d., even though I'd already seen this in the news.
> 
> When I was in about the fourth grade I read everything I could get my hands on about Helen Keller. Fascinating woman. Did you know that she was a Socialist?
> 
> Anyway, I'd bet that you probably have seen pictures of Annie before and just don't remember...there are a number of them around.


 
I'd known about her being a Socialist, though that had slipped my mind in all these years. As for the photos... perhaps, or perhaps it's one of those odd cases that I just never happened to come across them for one reason or another....

Either way, always glad to see something like this....


----------



## Drachir (Mar 9, 2008)

littlemissattitude said:


> Thanks for that, j. d., even though I'd already seen this in the news.
> 
> When I was in about the fourth grade I read everything I could get my hands on about Helen Keller. Fascinating woman. Did you know that she was a Socialist?
> 
> Anyway, I'd bet that you probably have seen pictures of Annie before and just don't remember...there are a number of them around.


 
I'm not sure what this post is supposed to mean.  Is being a socialist considered bad and if so why?


----------



## j d worthington (Mar 9, 2008)

Drachir said:


> I'm not sure what this post is supposed to mean. Is being a socialist considered bad and if so why?


 
There's still a fair amount of negativity attached to the term here in the States, yes; mainly fear of something not well understood (Socialism is still viewed, in the eyes of many, as little different from Anarchism or even Nihilism), and in other cases a reactionary stance against anything considered "liberal", "leftist", etc. (Think of the number of "Red Scares" we saw in the last century, for instance.)

The following will give you some by no means unbiassed, but still informative, background:

http://www.marxists.org/history/usa/parties/spusa/1900/0100-sdp-briefhistorysoc.pdf

However, in Annie's day, there was often considerably more violent reaction to such a political stance, alternating with periods of much more acceptance of it as a viable part of the political spectrum. There was a lot of what might be called "proto-Social Darwinism" in the air at that time, based on a lot of the political philosophy current in a period of rapid growth and expansion (especially coupled with the sorts of turmoil that was prevalent in the largest cities), so openly proclaiming to be a Socialist was a rather courageous thing to do... very much in line with much else I've heard of the lady.


----------



## littlemissattitude (Mar 9, 2008)

The thing that is interesting about Helen Keller having been a Socialist is that she is always held up to American school children (or at least was when I was in school) as a shining example of overcoming adversity to become a success in life. However, from the information given to most students, one would never have an inkling that she was a committed Socialist, something that is even still "beyond the pale" in most political discourse in the States. This is especially so in this day when the "middle" has been pushed so far to the right.

This phenomenon of "sanitizing" historical figures for the consumption of the American public is not rare, as I learned reading a book called _Lies My Teacher Told Me_, where Ms. Keller is just one of a number of examples of public figures whose political and social positions are not well known because they never make into the history books our students learn from. Sorry I can't recall the author's name off-hand, but if you're interested in history, and espeically how history is taught in the United States (and why most of us don't know that much about history and a lot that we do know is not really history but urban legend), it is well worth tracking down and reading.


----------



## j d worthington (Mar 9, 2008)

And a correction for my earlier post, meaning Helen, rather than Annie.... *sigh* I really do need to not post so quickly when I'm so blasted exhausted so much of the time....


----------



## Delvo (Mar 9, 2008)

Why would we teach the political ideas of people who are famous for non-political reasons? Not doing so isn't sanitizing; it's just not wasting time on irrelevancies. It's like teaching about the favorite foods of people whose importance has nothing to do with food or the dental health of people whose importance has nothing to do with teeth.


----------



## j d worthington (Mar 9, 2008)

Come now, Delvo, that's one of the most naïve statements (especially in context with our posts) I've seen. Even _capsule_ biographies of figures in literature, history, medicine, the sciences, etc., etc., etc., also briefly mention aspects of their life other than the specific for which they are well known; and when we're dealing with actually _teaching_ about a particular figure, this is much more extensive. You may not _concentrate_ on such an aspect, but it is brought into the discussion, to give a more rounded picture of them as a person, more of an insight into who they were and how they thought (or think, when it comes to the living). And, of course, the more of a part such an aspect played in their life, the more important it becomes in such a discussion.

The fact that, even this long after the fact, such is left out of such studies with Helen Keller (as well as many another figure) is _extremely_ telling....


----------



## Drachir (Mar 10, 2008)

Well, Delvo, and J.D., I am Canadian and in spite of Canada's close proximity to the United States many of our political ideas are quite different.  So far four Canadian provinces have put the socialist New Democratic Party into power for varying lengths of time and the most conservative of Canada's major parties, the Conservatives (or Progressive Conservatives provincially) would be considered to the left of the Democrats in the US.  Recently a TV show in which viewers were allowed to vote selected Tommy Douglas, a former NDP leader and the creator of Canada's medicare system, as the greatest Canadian.  A similar program selected left-leaning Liberal leader Pierre Trudeau as Canada's greatest Prime Minister.  You might remember Trudeau he was highly critical of the policies of Richard Nixon and Ronald Reagan.

Thanks for the link, J.D. I am fairly familiar with international socialism, having taught political science for thirty years, but a little more information is always welcome.


----------



## littlemissattitude (Mar 10, 2008)

Delvo said:


> Why would we teach the political ideas of people who are famous for non-political reasons? Not doing so isn't sanitizing; it's just not wasting time on irrelevancies. It's like teaching about the favorite foods of people whose importance has nothing to do with food or the dental health of people whose importance has nothing to do with teeth.


 
It is actually a glaring omission in the case of Helen Keller, who was an extremely political person.  She spent a significant portion of her adult life writing about and campaigning for Socialist causes.


----------

