Status
Available
Local notes
909 Va
Collection
Genres
Publication
W W Norton & Co Inc (1994), 640 pages
Description
History. Juvenile Nonfiction. HTML: The Story of Mankind revolutionized former methods of telling history. While it received the first Newbery Medal for the most distinguished contribution to American literature for children, critics and public alike hailed it as a book for all ages. Van Loon recounts history as living news, relating everything in the past to the present. From Western civilization's earliest times through to the beginning of the twentieth century, he emphasizes the people and events that changed the course of history, writing informally to make world history wonderfully alive and exciting. Of this book the author writes, "The entrance of America upon the scene of international politics as the most important actor...convinced me that a proper and reasonable understanding of historical cause and effect was the most important factor in the lives of the rising generation. And so my book...treats the entire history of the human race as a single unit...It begins with the dim and hardly understood realm of the earliest past; it can be continued forever.".… (more)
Awards
Newbery Medal (Medal Winner — 1922)
Original language
English
Original publication date
1921
Physical description
640 p.; 5.5 x 1.25 inches
User reviews
LibraryThing member gmillar
A history book for young people. Mr. Van Loon's illustrations are just delightful.
LibraryThing member tuckerresearch
I read an old hardcover version of this when I was kid and enjoyed it immensely. The winner of the first Newberry medal and a wonderful recipient. (I bet it wouldn't get the award today, because it is all "great man," "dead white guy" stuff.)
In the mid- 2000s I bought an updated paperback edition
Thus I dispensed with the paperback copy and bought the very edition I read as a kid, the mildly updated 1972 edition that still retains a bit of Van Loon's style. And that oh so gorgeous 1920s typeface!
In the mid- 2000s I bought an updated paperback edition
Show More
from 1999 and it angered me. The updater, Merriman, selects and writes differently. It is a pox on Van Loon. He has to be needlessly multicultural, anti-war, and, let's just say it, liberal. The new cartoon illustrations? Instead of heroic figures or easy-to-read maps, they depict horrible fears and the like. Van Loon had a progressive (almost Whiggish) view of history: we as humans were getting better. Merriman's new material denigrates Western society and makes you fear for humanity's future.Thus I dispensed with the paperback copy and bought the very edition I read as a kid, the mildly updated 1972 edition that still retains a bit of Van Loon's style. And that oh so gorgeous 1920s typeface!
Show Less
LibraryThing member zzelinski
Although I thoroughly enjoyed Van Loon's amusing anecdotally-structured history of mankind from the first organisms to the world wars, it was VERY history-heavy. Sadly, I feel like nonfiction isn't very appealing to the general young adult these days...though if there are any young adults
Show More
marginally interested in the subject, this is the book for them. His method of delivery, his parenthetical asides, and his unmistakable passion all conspire to bring the reader an enjoyable, fact-filled experience. Show Less
LibraryThing member tjsjohanna
I have to object to the title of this book - this is not the history of mankind. This is the history of western europeans. There's nothing about china, japan, india, phillipines - nothing in asia at all. Secondly this is a story, not really history. Mr. Van Loon presents as facts all kinds of
Show More
things that are up for debate. As a wide reaching overview of history it has some limited value, but overall this book is dated and, while the intent is admirable, the execution doesn't live up to the promise. Show Less
LibraryThing member debnance
I saved the worst for last. My final Newbery and what a struggle it was to get through it! This is the story of the history of the world through the ages, written for a young audience. It is said to have been amended and updated and added to, but, if that is so, I can only shudder to think of the
Show More
awful book that this book was originally. It is, in its present form, chock full of cruel opinions and mean asides about various peoples and their actions through the ages. I had considered keeping this book for my library, but, having read it, I cannot do it. Show Less
LibraryThing member flyingmonkey5
If I may riff from Lady Caroline Lamb, this book is mad, bad and dangerous to read. I wouldn't have bothered to finish, but I working on all of the Newberys so I suffered through. This is terrible history. Biased, racist, Euro-centric and paternalistic; I would hate to think that someone would read
Show More
this and think they know more about history. Van Loon provides opinion without any attempt at impartiality. Show Less
LibraryThing member mirrani
The title of this book is both correct and incorrect at the same time. While there is much talk in the beginning about how man came to be, the author chose to ignore all but Europeans for the most part because, in his opinion, they did the most notable things in history. The important thing to
Another thing to keep in mind is that in the 1920s, history wasn't what it is today. Research was done differently and less was known about the world nearly 100 years ago. We thought we found all there was to discover in the Valley of the Kings in Egypt... Until they found KV-63 in 2005. And let's not forget that when most of us were of the target age of this book, Pluto was unquestionably a planet. Readers will find things in this book stated as fact that might very well have been the accepted history of the time, but that we now know more about. If looked at in this context, this book is a completely acceptable representation of certain histories of certain cultures. You get the double bonus of looking at history through the eyes of history, which is something I really enjoy.
There is a reason this book won the Newbery Prize. The information is presented with a storyteller's voice, even including humor at times. I can see how younger readers would find this a fascinating introduction to past events of the world, even if they had struggled with the subject before. They might even find a particular part of history they want to learn more about and branch off reading from there. In my mind, if a book as all encompassing as this one keeps younger people involved in learning about the past, it is something special and worthy of the attention.
Show More
remember when reading this book is that it was written in a different time from ours. Back in 1921, when it was first published, certain ways of thinking and speaking were completely acceptable. Of course a book written in this era, by a Dutch-American would center on European civilization and ignore most others. Anyone picking this book up should understand that fact of history before they dive in.Another thing to keep in mind is that in the 1920s, history wasn't what it is today. Research was done differently and less was known about the world nearly 100 years ago. We thought we found all there was to discover in the Valley of the Kings in Egypt... Until they found KV-63 in 2005. And let's not forget that when most of us were of the target age of this book, Pluto was unquestionably a planet. Readers will find things in this book stated as fact that might very well have been the accepted history of the time, but that we now know more about. If looked at in this context, this book is a completely acceptable representation of certain histories of certain cultures. You get the double bonus of looking at history through the eyes of history, which is something I really enjoy.
There is a reason this book won the Newbery Prize. The information is presented with a storyteller's voice, even including humor at times. I can see how younger readers would find this a fascinating introduction to past events of the world, even if they had struggled with the subject before. They might even find a particular part of history they want to learn more about and branch off reading from there. In my mind, if a book as all encompassing as this one keeps younger people involved in learning about the past, it is something special and worthy of the attention.
Show Less
LibraryThing member klburnside
The Story of Mankind is the 1922 Newbery winner, and the first book to receive the award. It chronicles the history of "mankind" from its single cell origins through the end of World War I. I'm not sure what inspired the Newbery committee to choose a nearly 500 page book with such an ambitious
First off, the book is incredibly Eurocentric. There is barely a mention of the world beyond Europe. There is brief discussion of the Middle East and one chapter entitled, "Concerning Buddha and Confucius" that deals with Eastern religions. Egypt is mentioned in chapters detailing the beginning of civilization, but the rest of Africa may as well not even exist, except for the "heathenish tribes...who worshiped sticks and stones and dead trees." The Native Americans also do not merit a mention. At times, Van Loon is apologetic about this, saying, "I wish that I could tell you what happened to Norway and Switzerland and Serbia and China. But these lands exercised no great influence upon the development of Europe in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. I therefore pass them by with a polite an very respectful bow."
Towards the end of the book he talks about how he had one rule for deciding what to put in his book. "Did the country or the person in question produce a new idea or perform an original act without which the history of the entire human race would have been different?" It seems like a nearly impossible question to answer, but Van Loon doesn't hesitate to answer this question in regards to the Mongolians. "No race ever played a more picturesque role in history than the Mongolians," he writes, "and no race, from the point of view of achievement or intelligent progress, was of less value to the rest of mankind." Yikes. Not so much of a polite and respectful bow there. I can't decide if I prefer the patronizing, the condemning, or complete omitting of certain groups.
I will also mention Van Loon's cringe-worthy discussion of slavery in the Americas. He writes the "negroes were strong and could withstand rough treatment...[and] association with the white man would give them a chance to learn Christianity...so from every possible point of view, it would be an excellent arrangement both for the kindly white man and for his ignorant black brother." Wowzers. Soon after, Van Loon condemns slavery as practiced in the Americas, but his condemnation seems to be mostly an, "oops, maybe we went a little to far trying to save these ignorant heathens." (I am putting these words in his mouth.)
This review is already long, but so I won't discuss my issues with Van Loon's portrayal of the Jews killing Jesus or the fearless Muslims so excited about paradise they are running directly into European machine gun fire. Nor will I dwell on the fact that I could probably count the number of women mentioned in this book on one hand.
In spite of these things, I found some parts of the book to be surprisingly progressive. The book was written just before the Scopes Trial, but evolution is presented as a fact and there is no mention whatsoever of creationism. Van Loon also states the the Bible is not a reliable source of scientific knowledge and the most important messages in the Bible are those of love, charity, and forgiveness. He encourages his readers to question their own stereotypes, ask questions, and see history from all angles. A good student of history should attempt to uncover the hidden motives behind people's actions, because it is only through understanding that we can truly make the world a more peaceful place.
I think that Van Loon was well-intentioned, but very misguided in writing this book. He wanted kids to understand and love history, and most importantly to learn from it. If the book were written today, I would be more adamant that is an infuriating, condescending, and worthless piece of literature. Since it was written nearly one hundred years ago, I will exercise some restraint. It had its good moments.
That being said, the book was very dense, mostly very boring, and I would not recommend it to anyone unless you have taken on the senseless project of reading all the Newbery winners.
Show More
scope, and I really can't see how this book would have gotten children excited about either reading or history. First off, the book is incredibly Eurocentric. There is barely a mention of the world beyond Europe. There is brief discussion of the Middle East and one chapter entitled, "Concerning Buddha and Confucius" that deals with Eastern religions. Egypt is mentioned in chapters detailing the beginning of civilization, but the rest of Africa may as well not even exist, except for the "heathenish tribes...who worshiped sticks and stones and dead trees." The Native Americans also do not merit a mention. At times, Van Loon is apologetic about this, saying, "I wish that I could tell you what happened to Norway and Switzerland and Serbia and China. But these lands exercised no great influence upon the development of Europe in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. I therefore pass them by with a polite an very respectful bow."
Towards the end of the book he talks about how he had one rule for deciding what to put in his book. "Did the country or the person in question produce a new idea or perform an original act without which the history of the entire human race would have been different?" It seems like a nearly impossible question to answer, but Van Loon doesn't hesitate to answer this question in regards to the Mongolians. "No race ever played a more picturesque role in history than the Mongolians," he writes, "and no race, from the point of view of achievement or intelligent progress, was of less value to the rest of mankind." Yikes. Not so much of a polite and respectful bow there. I can't decide if I prefer the patronizing, the condemning, or complete omitting of certain groups.
I will also mention Van Loon's cringe-worthy discussion of slavery in the Americas. He writes the "negroes were strong and could withstand rough treatment...[and] association with the white man would give them a chance to learn Christianity...so from every possible point of view, it would be an excellent arrangement both for the kindly white man and for his ignorant black brother." Wowzers. Soon after, Van Loon condemns slavery as practiced in the Americas, but his condemnation seems to be mostly an, "oops, maybe we went a little to far trying to save these ignorant heathens." (I am putting these words in his mouth.)
This review is already long, but so I won't discuss my issues with Van Loon's portrayal of the Jews killing Jesus or the fearless Muslims so excited about paradise they are running directly into European machine gun fire. Nor will I dwell on the fact that I could probably count the number of women mentioned in this book on one hand.
In spite of these things, I found some parts of the book to be surprisingly progressive. The book was written just before the Scopes Trial, but evolution is presented as a fact and there is no mention whatsoever of creationism. Van Loon also states the the Bible is not a reliable source of scientific knowledge and the most important messages in the Bible are those of love, charity, and forgiveness. He encourages his readers to question their own stereotypes, ask questions, and see history from all angles. A good student of history should attempt to uncover the hidden motives behind people's actions, because it is only through understanding that we can truly make the world a more peaceful place.
I think that Van Loon was well-intentioned, but very misguided in writing this book. He wanted kids to understand and love history, and most importantly to learn from it. If the book were written today, I would be more adamant that is an infuriating, condescending, and worthless piece of literature. Since it was written nearly one hundred years ago, I will exercise some restraint. It had its good moments.
That being said, the book was very dense, mostly very boring, and I would not recommend it to anyone unless you have taken on the senseless project of reading all the Newbery winners.
Show Less
LibraryThing member Cheryl_in_CC_NV
Didn't read this, just thumbed through it out of curiosity because it's the first winner of the Newbery. The updates, fyi, don't appear to fix the original, but rather just tack on new stuff at the end. It does seem to be charming and interesting enough to deserve accolades *in context* of its time
Show More
and place. However, there are too many errors, too much Euro-centrism, etc. for it to have much value to modern children. I enjoyed thumbing through it but would not encourage my children to read it. Show Less
LibraryThing member nivramkoorb
The is book was written in 1921 with a quick follow up by others than Van Loon that brings the history up to 2000. It is interesting to read a book about history that ends almost 90 years ago. It is more of a history of Europe and Western Civilization. Van Loon does explain why he included things
Show More
and not other things. It was written for young adults so it is simplistic but that is what makes it accessible. A good book for young people to read but they probably won't because of when it was written. We had this book in our book shelf so I grabbed it to read on a trip to Paris. Reading this while in Europe was great because you were in the place where this history occurred. Not sure if I would recommend this book but would recommend that all Americans read more about history. Show Less
LibraryThing member mykl-s
Colonialist, sexist, incomplete, but I did learn something about history.d
Similar in this library
Pages
640