A section of primary sources section.
To anyone who knows my script (July and Half of August), you’ll see where the whole Warren Report joke comes from. On one of my tours of Graceland, they had Elvis’ books laid out on a desk and right in the middle of it was the Warren Report.
I’ve read both that and the 9/11 Commission because I always want to know what’s going on. Even the lies are revealing.
A Documentary History of the United States
is an invaluable (and cheaply priced) resource. It has everything from Thomas Paine’s Rights of Man to the Declaration of Independence to excerpts from the Federalist Papers.
Speaking of The Federalist Papers
… naturally I have a copy since it’s a GOLDMINE. Also, it’s mostly Alexander Hamilton’s handiwork. John Jay wrote 5 of the essays before falling ill and dropping out of the ambitious project of “selling” the idea of the Constitution to the people of New York. Madison wrote many of the essays. Hamilton wrote most, by a long shot. (However, James Madison wrote Federalist 10 – my favorite of them all. It should be required reading – especially now!!) I have another copy of The Federalist Papers, a beautiful hardcover book bound in red leather. It was my grandfather’s. But I dip into Federalist so often I bought a cheap paperback, to save the other one from wear and tear.
The Federalist Papers are such amazing documents. #51 (also Madison) is my favorite, with the “if men were angels… if angels were to govern men…” section a particular favorite.
There really is something extra, somehow better, with references on paper. Even with 25 years of reading thing on the internet, it seems more of a source for information while paper seems like more of a source for wisdom or knowledge. It could be nothing more than the fact that ink on paper is easier to read than even the best displays – so that makes the ink-written word stand out more, creates more of an impression. Or just the historical weight (and physical weight) of books has a hold on us oldsters. Don’t know.
I wonder how the written word/literary culture will change as speech recognition becomes even better and ubiquitous. Will reading the printed word return to an academics-only thing in 25 years if non-academics can do everything by talking to machines? I’m not suggesting that would be bad, just wondering. I do like the democratizing effects of near-universal literacy.
Will the opening crawl of Star Wars 37: A Stale Aspiration need a voice over “It continues to be a dark time for the rebellion…” since few people will be capable of reading the text? That does seem like a sad thing to contemplate.