How did the public react to the role of historians, and how did historians respond to the popularity of Howard Zinn’s A People’s History of the United States?

by floopyfloppygal

Zinn’s A People’s History of the United States is now often used as a supplementary text to the textbook in some history classes. I want to know if there was any backlash from the public toward the work of historians as people learned how a narrative can be written in a biased way?

I also want to know how historians in general responded to the popularity of this book, and did this change how historians conceived of their role and relationship to the public?

Would love secondary sources to check out! :)

mikedash

Zinn has been praised for opening up his readers' minds to fresh perspectives on history as it is usually told at school, and criticised for the way in which he's interpreted the evidence to do so. There will be more to say, especially as the resource on Zinn we offer in our FAQ is eight years old and no longer remotely meets the standards of this sub. But it does cover some basics across multiple posts, and links to some of the resources you are asking about, so it will have to do for now.

Hopefully others with more time than I have right now will swing by to answer you directly in more detail. Meanwhile, with a hat-tip to u/DanKensington...