A bad interpretation of history is related to denialism. Denialism is the act of rejecting the truth in the face of proof or strong and valid evidence that exists. It can be mainly made by replicating history records or documents. According to Richard J. Evans, this action will create a sense of doubt in the genuine record and thus create a false interpretation of the event. This can be seen in Holocaust denial. It is a strategy intended to discredit or put doubt on the Holocaust’s historical facts. Deniers engage in this behavior to diminish public sympathy for Jews, undermine the legitimacy of the State of Israel, sow doubt about Jews and the Holocaust, and attract attention to certain topics or points of view. However upon the discovery of Anne Frank’s diary, one of the victims of the Holocaust, the scholars had rejected the denial and the British court judged David Irving, a Holocaust denier to be a “historical falsifier, anti-Semitic, and racist who was linked with right-wing radicals who supported neo-Nazism”. Other than that, history interpretation is also influenced by political power. This can be seen in 2007 when Shinzo Abe, the prime minister of Japan at that time stated that there is no strong evidence to prove that sexual slavery was coercion by the Japanese military during the second Sino-Japanese war. Due to this statement, it influenced few people to interpret that the incident never took place, and even some radical groups interpreted the death toll as purely military and that no such crimes were ever committed. This shows how much power politics have in history interpretation among historians and the public. Even so, as a knower, we can differentiate these false interpretations by referring back to the latest evidence that is available and the scholars’ reasoning regarding the history.

In conclusion, we can say that to distinguish between good and bad interpretation is the closeness of it to the truth or reality. Interpretation is a process of triggering the meaning of a certain matter, therefore when the process is being disturbed by certain matters such as exaggeration and denialism, the interpretation being made is still considered as a bad interpretation even though it is the closest to the truth. In both art and history, logical explanation and evidence are required to create a good interpretation. However, this does not limit the use of imagination when interpreting art or historical sources.