While in my younger days I would probably have agreed with this, now I think that it's more defeatist and nihilist than is warranted. The Civil War example I cited above shows why: all of the areas of focus really happened. Soldiers did experience the front lines of combat, but slavery really was the beating heart of the war. Society really was fundamentally altered in ways that heavily affected women (and men and children and everyone, even those not at the front), and Reconstruction really did happen, and the Redeemers really did overthrow it. Books about all of those topics won Pulitzer Prizes and were Best Sellers and all the rest. People did actually learn about these real things, and some of them did incorporate those changes into their world view. They were stories people were interested in, because they spoke to the struggles that they encountered, not as something that flattered their already existing prejudices. That's a hell of a lot better than you are arguing here.
And then something like Hamilton can come along and make a LOT of people reconsider a lot of things all at once. Hamilton might not be particularly accurate as history, but it definitely was a much needed correction to 1776, rather closer than the previous award-winning American Revolution musical.
As for the difficulty of checking primary sources, this is true in any field of knowledge. Just like I can in theory read the Declarations of Succession, I can in theory verify General Relativity, but I'm not actually capable of making observations precise enough to do so, so I have to trust that those who are do a good job. There are plenty of people who would claim that I am being duped, and that I am only accepting that GR exists because it fits my world view. For example, the entire Deutsche Physik movement thought it was trumped up sizzle.
And then something like Hamilton can come along and make a LOT of people reconsider a lot of things all at once. Hamilton might not be particularly accurate as history, but it definitely was a much needed correction to 1776, rather closer than the previous award-winning American Revolution musical.
As for the difficulty of checking primary sources, this is true in any field of knowledge. Just like I can in theory read the Declarations of Succession, I can in theory verify General Relativity, but I'm not actually capable of making observations precise enough to do so, so I have to trust that those who are do a good job. There are plenty of people who would claim that I am being duped, and that I am only accepting that GR exists because it fits my world view. For example, the entire Deutsche Physik movement thought it was trumped up sizzle.