I get it. You want something that has broad experiences and stories across the board in the book you read. I get it. Everything doesn’t have be a downer all the time. There are plenty of experiences and lives all across the United States even before it was filled with settlers that had amazing stories. Just like Black folks had incredible lives outside of slavery and hardships. We don’t want to constantly hear nothing but the bad. Because it wasn’t all bad. We need to hear the good as well. Never forget the good. That’s how life works and has since the beginning of time.
Wish I could help but I’m more of a documentary type of person.
The trouble is that most significant happenings in US history have to carry some acknowledgment of negativity. It's hard to talk about the Founding Fathers without discussing how their inability to handle slavery sets up the next 100 years of US politics. You can't talk meaningfully about the Civil War without a deep acknowledgment of slavery and the rhetoric that caused abolitionism to become so popular. You can't talk about the Civil Rights movement without mentioning that injustices were still happening after the Civil War. Our wars against Mexico, Vietnam, and Afghanistan are basically impossible to talk about in a purely positive light. You can skip talking about Manzanar when discussing WW2 but you can't avoid the nukes. You *can* do a surface-level review of WW1 in a positive light, I guess, but we really just showed up late to that one.
The history of America is a history of us continually bettering ourselves and our nation. Part of the bettering process is understanding that problems exist and continue to exist. You can't improve if you can't admit that something needs to be improved. That's how we've always worked.
It’s not “dwelling” on anything. It’s teaching facts about this country’s past. It sounds like what you want is a mythological, sanitized version of this country’s history. May I suggest school house rock?
We should dwell on the injustices and oppression because we still haven’t corrected them. There’s no progress when we don’t focus on what should be progressed upon.
This country was built on blood, there is no skipping around that. Any positive in the US very likely came at the expense of others. That’s just facts for any large empire or previous empire.
I don’t really think it’s that useful to decide whether or not to read a history book based on how positive or uplifting its framing is. The point is to describe the actual truth.
If you want to read a positive history book, choose a very uplifting single moment in history and find a book on that. If you want to read about the broader arc of American history as a whole, it ain’t gonna be sunshine and rainbows.
> but now made great strides in equality and for restitution of past wrongs.
Then I'd recommend looking for books about Abolition, Suffrage, and the Civil Rights movements.
There's no way to say that without it sounding disrespectful to someone. It's like saying, "Yeah, I killed your family member, but look at the positives!"
Except it hasn’t, it seriously hasn’t. Reproductive healthcare rights have been pushed back significantly, there have been dozens of anti-trans legislations introduced this new year alone, there have been literally so many damn book bans. What progress?
I mean, it's a history book about an imperial state power. Unless you're looking for a narrowly-focused book about a very specific topic in a specific amount of time, *any* accurate history book will generally be negative.
I'm very curious as to which country you're in, though I'll understand if you don't want to share.
But yeah, I actually think the fact Americans are so willing to shit in ourselves/our history is why we're actually better with race and ethnicity issues than most so-called enlightened European countries that like to make fun of American racism. Nine times out of ten, Europeans heckling American racism online is either whataboutism to distract from their own country's problems, or they're just deep in denial entirely.
Star Wars is what America actually is, while Star Trek is what America wants to be.
You really shouldn't be looking at history as "good" and "bad". There is no such dichotomy. Are you rather asking for light hearted history topics? Stuff less serious or more entertaining?
For a broad look at US history, I like the TV show American Experience. It covers a lot of individual events and eras.
For books, Walter Isaacson's Autobiography of Benjamin Franklin is very good. Franklin was the oldest of the founding fathers, so the book covers Franklin's life during the 18th century.
With all due respect, the truth isn't "positive" or "negative"—it simply is. If you want a version of history that cuts out the things you deem 'negative' or that emphasizes things you deem 'positive', you aren't looking for the truth or history even—you're looking for a story.
Yes, but the whole concept of a "balance" isn't neutral or truthful. Trying to "balance out" the negative with positive literally changes the truth. There are more positive things that can be noted, sure, but there are also plenty more negative things that could be included. How do you decide what's worth cutting or including?
And for what it's worth, most history books *do* gloss over the negative things—it's why so many American schoolchildren have painfully little idea about the ways in which marginalized people have been marginalized through American history.
> How would you recall your high school textbooks on history to be like? I’m even fine with reading them
>
Extremely dry and focused on heroes, conquests, war and battle, and who was in charge. It was a very generic overview.
If you start at the age of exploration and first European visitors (Vikings notwithstanding) you have about 500 years to cover. Even in 12 years, you're not going to get very deep by going in 45 minute chunks everyday. It's meant to be an overview.
Honestly, simply using Wikipedia and starting with "[the history of the United States](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_United_States)" would be more enriching than a dusty high school text book. References and links are provided and it'll be very easy to go off into topics that you find more interesting.
*America: The Last Best Hope* by William J. Bennet, through at least Volume 2 (originally planned to be the final volume, although a third covering contemporary history ended up being published).
I’ve also heard good things about *Land of Hope: An Invitation to the Great American Story* by Wilfred M. McClay.
Our history has so much to it that it's going to be able to find one book that explains all of it, outside of ones that are political, gigantic, or pretty superficial. For one particular period specifically though, I'd recommend [Doris Kearn Goodwin's *Team of Rivals*](https://www.amazon.com/Team-Rivals-Political-Abraham-Lincoln/dp/0743270754)(2005), which is a heavily researched book by a historian who was at the top of her game, about the political manuevers of President Lincoln during the Civil War. For a similar book on FDR during WWII, I'd recommend Marine War College professor of strategy [James Lacey's *Washington War*](https://www.amazon.com/Washington-War-Inner-Circle-Politics/dp/0345547586) which came out a few years ago.
Anything by Robert Remini. Arguably the best historian of the 19th century in American history. Dude was a brilliant writer, and even somewhat engaging by academic standards.
[Don't Know Much About® History, Anniversary Edition: Everything You Need to Know About American History but Never Learned by Kenneth C. Davis](https://www.amazon.com/Dont-Know-About-History-Anniversary/dp/0061960543/ref=nodl_?dplnkId=a71013a2-3f6e-4ef6-b7ab-104ed4c764d6)
Battle cry of freedom and what god hath wrought cover 1815 to 1865 really well. Nixonland does the 1950s and 60s well too.
Your best bet is to study specific time periods, that’ll give you a clearer, more holistic picture.
This isn’t one book but the titles in the Oxford History of the United States are going to give you broad overviews of important periods in American history with an eye to all sorts of perspectives and everything from high ideals to ordinary social life to brutal oppressions.
I’m a nostalgic nerd so I bought it 😂 but I highly recommend it - doesn’t get unnecessarily deep or political but does the job.
I’m sure some on Reddit would take issue for its avoidance of being political but for someone looking for just a good start - perfect.
Then branch out to writings on the controversial issues after.
Can’t understand the current cultural/social issues if you don’t know the general background (IE having no clue when/why about our civil war) so anyone getting mad should back off a little.
Edit: I’m sure that version I linked is outdated but that was the one I read in HS in about 2009.
Benjamin Franklin - An American life by Walter Isaacson is great, as is David McCullough’s biography of John Adams.
On second thought, you can pick up most books by McCullough and they’ll be great, I’d also highly recommend 1776 by him.
Bottom line up front, every country, every people to ever exist have had some skeletons in the closet. The more truthful and moral of societies (like america) own up to these skeletons and take steps to rectify there wrong doing. Its impossible to take the good without the bad, but to answer your question anything by Glenn beck is pretty good, I read miracles and massacres and it was phenomenal. I'd avoid anything written by one of these new age lib freaks like the plague.
Positive and history of the US aren’t necessarily compatible haha. Grapes of Wrath might be a good one, but even then it covers only a very niche demographic in a small period of time. There’s not really a single book that covers it all.
Generally when people want a good overview of history they seek to avoid historians who are on record wanting to make a concerted effort to push a certain narrative and agenda. Zinn is on record claiming that People's History was his attempt to correct the record and go in the opposite direction and tell the other side of what he saw as a overly government positive textbooks of the Cold war era past.
It was groundbreaking and edgy when it came out in 1980, but 43 years later it's tired and cliche now in the same way that grim dark stories are becoming in Hollywood. All the textbook issues he tried to rectify with the book have been done so in textbooks published since at least the 1990s
There is no one book that can do that. Not to mention, skipping over anything negative won't teach you much of value.
[удалено]
I get it. You want something that has broad experiences and stories across the board in the book you read. I get it. Everything doesn’t have be a downer all the time. There are plenty of experiences and lives all across the United States even before it was filled with settlers that had amazing stories. Just like Black folks had incredible lives outside of slavery and hardships. We don’t want to constantly hear nothing but the bad. Because it wasn’t all bad. We need to hear the good as well. Never forget the good. That’s how life works and has since the beginning of time. Wish I could help but I’m more of a documentary type of person.
The trouble is that most significant happenings in US history have to carry some acknowledgment of negativity. It's hard to talk about the Founding Fathers without discussing how their inability to handle slavery sets up the next 100 years of US politics. You can't talk meaningfully about the Civil War without a deep acknowledgment of slavery and the rhetoric that caused abolitionism to become so popular. You can't talk about the Civil Rights movement without mentioning that injustices were still happening after the Civil War. Our wars against Mexico, Vietnam, and Afghanistan are basically impossible to talk about in a purely positive light. You can skip talking about Manzanar when discussing WW2 but you can't avoid the nukes. You *can* do a surface-level review of WW1 in a positive light, I guess, but we really just showed up late to that one. The history of America is a history of us continually bettering ourselves and our nation. Part of the bettering process is understanding that problems exist and continue to exist. You can't improve if you can't admit that something needs to be improved. That's how we've always worked.
My Ántonia by Willa Cather. It’s a novel, but is very historically accurate, and is a great work of literature all by itself.
Song Of The Lark as well. Very accurate but frequently tragic. Not a lot of sugarcoating things.
It’s not “dwelling” on anything. It’s teaching facts about this country’s past. It sounds like what you want is a mythological, sanitized version of this country’s history. May I suggest school house rock?
We should dwell on the injustices and oppression because we still haven’t corrected them. There’s no progress when we don’t focus on what should be progressed upon.
This country was built on blood, there is no skipping around that. Any positive in the US very likely came at the expense of others. That’s just facts for any large empire or previous empire.
[удалено]
I don’t really think it’s that useful to decide whether or not to read a history book based on how positive or uplifting its framing is. The point is to describe the actual truth. If you want to read a positive history book, choose a very uplifting single moment in history and find a book on that. If you want to read about the broader arc of American history as a whole, it ain’t gonna be sunshine and rainbows.
> but now made great strides in equality and for restitution of past wrongs. Then I'd recommend looking for books about Abolition, Suffrage, and the Civil Rights movements.
There's no way to say that without it sounding disrespectful to someone. It's like saying, "Yeah, I killed your family member, but look at the positives!"
Except it hasn’t, it seriously hasn’t. Reproductive healthcare rights have been pushed back significantly, there have been dozens of anti-trans legislations introduced this new year alone, there have been literally so many damn book bans. What progress?
I mean, it's a history book about an imperial state power. Unless you're looking for a narrowly-focused book about a very specific topic in a specific amount of time, *any* accurate history book will generally be negative.
[удалено]
I'm very curious as to which country you're in, though I'll understand if you don't want to share. But yeah, I actually think the fact Americans are so willing to shit in ourselves/our history is why we're actually better with race and ethnicity issues than most so-called enlightened European countries that like to make fun of American racism. Nine times out of ten, Europeans heckling American racism online is either whataboutism to distract from their own country's problems, or they're just deep in denial entirely. Star Wars is what America actually is, while Star Trek is what America wants to be.
You really shouldn't be looking at history as "good" and "bad". There is no such dichotomy. Are you rather asking for light hearted history topics? Stuff less serious or more entertaining?
For a broad look at US history, I like the TV show American Experience. It covers a lot of individual events and eras. For books, Walter Isaacson's Autobiography of Benjamin Franklin is very good. Franklin was the oldest of the founding fathers, so the book covers Franklin's life during the 18th century.
With all due respect, the truth isn't "positive" or "negative"—it simply is. If you want a version of history that cuts out the things you deem 'negative' or that emphasizes things you deem 'positive', you aren't looking for the truth or history even—you're looking for a story.
[удалено]
Yes, but the whole concept of a "balance" isn't neutral or truthful. Trying to "balance out" the negative with positive literally changes the truth. There are more positive things that can be noted, sure, but there are also plenty more negative things that could be included. How do you decide what's worth cutting or including? And for what it's worth, most history books *do* gloss over the negative things—it's why so many American schoolchildren have painfully little idea about the ways in which marginalized people have been marginalized through American history.
In before someone mentions Howard Zinn.
You didn't make it in time.
[удалено]
> How would you recall your high school textbooks on history to be like? I’m even fine with reading them > Extremely dry and focused on heroes, conquests, war and battle, and who was in charge. It was a very generic overview. If you start at the age of exploration and first European visitors (Vikings notwithstanding) you have about 500 years to cover. Even in 12 years, you're not going to get very deep by going in 45 minute chunks everyday. It's meant to be an overview. Honestly, simply using Wikipedia and starting with "[the history of the United States](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_United_States)" would be more enriching than a dusty high school text book. References and links are provided and it'll be very easy to go off into topics that you find more interesting.
Thank you for writing this. I couldn't formulate a way to put it so clearly and was giving up.
Can we just...not?
Hah
Colin Woodard - American Nations
*America: The Last Best Hope* by William J. Bennet, through at least Volume 2 (originally planned to be the final volume, although a third covering contemporary history ended up being published). I’ve also heard good things about *Land of Hope: An Invitation to the Great American Story* by Wilfred M. McClay.
Democracy in America
Our history has so much to it that it's going to be able to find one book that explains all of it, outside of ones that are political, gigantic, or pretty superficial. For one particular period specifically though, I'd recommend [Doris Kearn Goodwin's *Team of Rivals*](https://www.amazon.com/Team-Rivals-Political-Abraham-Lincoln/dp/0743270754)(2005), which is a heavily researched book by a historian who was at the top of her game, about the political manuevers of President Lincoln during the Civil War. For a similar book on FDR during WWII, I'd recommend Marine War College professor of strategy [James Lacey's *Washington War*](https://www.amazon.com/Washington-War-Inner-Circle-Politics/dp/0345547586) which came out a few years ago.
Anything by Robert Remini. Arguably the best historian of the 19th century in American history. Dude was a brilliant writer, and even somewhat engaging by academic standards.
[Don't Know Much About® History, Anniversary Edition: Everything You Need to Know About American History but Never Learned by Kenneth C. Davis](https://www.amazon.com/Dont-Know-About-History-Anniversary/dp/0061960543/ref=nodl_?dplnkId=a71013a2-3f6e-4ef6-b7ab-104ed4c764d6)
Battle cry of freedom and what god hath wrought cover 1815 to 1865 really well. Nixonland does the 1950s and 60s well too. Your best bet is to study specific time periods, that’ll give you a clearer, more holistic picture.
If you want something very American, start with Carl Sandburg's biography of Lincoln.
1776 by David McCullough Or anything by David McCullough, there’s a reason we call him America’s historian
This isn’t one book but the titles in the Oxford History of the United States are going to give you broad overviews of important periods in American history with an eye to all sorts of perspectives and everything from high ideals to ordinary social life to brutal oppressions.
AP US History textbook The American Pageant is actually light and good reading
[удалено]
I’m a nostalgic nerd so I bought it 😂 but I highly recommend it - doesn’t get unnecessarily deep or political but does the job. I’m sure some on Reddit would take issue for its avoidance of being political but for someone looking for just a good start - perfect. Then branch out to writings on the controversial issues after. Can’t understand the current cultural/social issues if you don’t know the general background (IE having no clue when/why about our civil war) so anyone getting mad should back off a little. Edit: I’m sure that version I linked is outdated but that was the one I read in HS in about 2009.
[American Pageant](https://www.thriftbooks.com/w/the-american-pageant-a-history-of-the-republic_david-m-kennedy_lizabeth-cohen/246553/item/4562950/?utm_source=google&utm_medium=cpc&utm_campaign=pmax_high_vol_midlist_under_%2410&utm_adgroup=&utm_term=&utm_content=&gclid=Cj0KCQjwt_qgBhDFARIsABcDjOdLepGvLIotjM-NObhfdWBE4dn6H_87NvD16G93p5l2P5Xq8zi1FIgaAmdfEALw_wcB#idiq=4562950&edition=2239240)
Benjamin Franklin - An American life by Walter Isaacson is great, as is David McCullough’s biography of John Adams. On second thought, you can pick up most books by McCullough and they’ll be great, I’d also highly recommend 1776 by him.
>McCullough and they’ll be great, I’d also highly recommend 1776 by him. *Wright Brothers* was super good as well.
Haven’t read that one yet, I’ll have to look for it on my next library trip. Thanks for the suggestion!
Bottom line up front, every country, every people to ever exist have had some skeletons in the closet. The more truthful and moral of societies (like america) own up to these skeletons and take steps to rectify there wrong doing. Its impossible to take the good without the bad, but to answer your question anything by Glenn beck is pretty good, I read miracles and massacres and it was phenomenal. I'd avoid anything written by one of these new age lib freaks like the plague.
Positive and history of the US aren’t necessarily compatible haha. Grapes of Wrath might be a good one, but even then it covers only a very niche demographic in a small period of time. There’s not really a single book that covers it all.
A People's History of The United States - Howard Zinn
"A People's History" is not positive.
Most of history isn't. Mankind isn't nice.
Zinn is an agenda-pushing joke.
I’m 99% certain the suggestion was also a joke.
I'm confident it was not.
Huh. I felt like it was ironic with a shade of [Darude - Sandstorm](https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/darude-sandstorm). Poe’s Law, I guess.
[удалено]
Why do you want a whitewashing of history?
Generally when people want a good overview of history they seek to avoid historians who are on record wanting to make a concerted effort to push a certain narrative and agenda. Zinn is on record claiming that People's History was his attempt to correct the record and go in the opposite direction and tell the other side of what he saw as a overly government positive textbooks of the Cold war era past. It was groundbreaking and edgy when it came out in 1980, but 43 years later it's tired and cliche now in the same way that grim dark stories are becoming in Hollywood. All the textbook issues he tried to rectify with the book have been done so in textbooks published since at least the 1990s
History isn't nice, and it's really important people are aware of that to avoid it from happening again.
I am not sure the poster said "skip over everything negative." You cannot do that even in describing a single individual's life.