History and Biography
Narrative is a fundamental aspect of an effective historical composition. A successful narrative can provide important sensory details that a straightforward analysis may omit. David Hackett Fischer suggests, “To reconstruct a series of happenings, the best and only instrument is narrative.” Even so, many historians still struggle with the status of narrative in scholarly works. Similar sentiments follow the genre of biography in history. Biography is equally controversial, as many historians have dissenting opinions regarding its treatment and official definition.
The standard definition of narrative is an account that contains a beginning, middle and end. Likewise, it is important that it is
…show more content…
Scholars believe that the emphasis placed on the individual directs attention away from more important questions of broader causes and developments. Such conversations point to the agency of the individual. Biography in a historical context in general relies less on the emphasis on personality Furthermore, the historical theory of “objectivity” may be endangered when examining personality. Other disciplines employ personality as a stylistic mechanism. Historical writing may utilize some stylistic techniques, but should emphasize credible sources and interpretation. To many historians today, and certain to the European empiricists of the 19th century, objectivity should be as present as possible to fashion an effective piece. In general, biography is more often than not seen as an inferior form of historical analysis.
Historians like Barbara Caine argue biography should focus on the life of the individual but only individuals of significance. Furthermore, Scottish philosopher of the 19th century, Thomas Carlyle commended biography for presenting historical figures as ‘real beings, which were once alive, beings of his own flesh and blood, not mere shadows and dim abstractions.” Though successfully implementing this method can add a dimension of human connection, special measures must be taken to ensure that this does not take away from fundamental structures of historical
…show more content…
However, it is important as a historian, to keep these mechanisms in check and maintain the tenants of historical writing. As evidenced in this analysis, centuries of historians have grappled with these genres. Some argue that analysis is superior to narrative while others believe that narrative is the most important aspect of a successful composition. Similar dissent has taken place regarding biography in historical writing. Whether the focus lie in the individual or a broader theme in history or a specific event, historians should form their own opinions, but maintain the necessary framework of historical
The vocabulary, the storyline, and the topic are easy for the reader to read and understand what is going on. This book is intended to be read in a school setting with students and professors using it as a tool in their classroom. Godbeer writing history as a narrative makes it easier for the reader to understand, it also allows them to get an overall sense of how things were being handled. The fact that Godbeer uses primary sources of court documents and testimonies gives truth and support behind his writing, making the reader confident in his writing.
The Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass written by Frederick Douglass himself is a brutally honest portrayal of slavery's dehumanizing capabilities. The style of this famous autobiography can be best described as personal, emotional, and compelling. By writing this narrative, Douglass wants his audience to understand him. He does this by speaking informally like a person would when writing a letter or telling a story to a friend. By clearly establishing his credibility and connecting with his audience, Douglass uses numerous rhetorical devices to argue for the immorality of slavery.
When inquiring about the comparisons and contrasts between Melville’s Benito Cereno and Frederick Douglass’s Narrative of the Life of an American Slave, Written by Himself, the following question almost inevitably arises: Can a work of fiction and an autobiography be compared at all? Indeed, the structure of the two stories differs greatly. Whereas Douglass’s Narrative adapts a typical pattern of autobiographies, i.e. a chronological order of birth, childhood memories, events that helped shape the narrator etc., Benito Cereno is based on a peculiar three-layered foundation of a central story recounting the main events, a deposition delineating the events prior to the first part, and an ending.
historian I would only be able to produce a weak article if I did not
To study history, the facts and information must be passed down. To do so, historians record the information in textbooks and other nonfiction works. Whether or not the historians retell facts or construct their own version of history is debatable. History can be percieved as being “constructed” by the historians due to their bias, elimination of controversy, strive for entertainment, and neglect to update the information.
The study of past events have been a common practice of mankind since the verbal telling of stories by our ancestors. William Cronon, in his article “Why the Past Matters,” asserts that the remembrance of the past “keeps us in place.” Our individual memories and experiences shape how we act in our daily lives. In addition to influencing us at an individual level, our collective history binds us together as a society. Without knowing where we have been or what we have experienced, it is nearly impossible to judge progress or know which courses of action to pursue. The goal of the historian is to analyze and explain past events, of which they rarely have firsthand memory of, and apply the gained knowledge to make connections with current and future events.
In The Houses of History, many different schools of historical thought are presented and light in shed on what exactly it means to be those different types of historians. Not all historians think the same way or approach history from the same perspective, but some similar groups of thought have converged together and have formed the various types of historians that will be presented, such as empiricists, psychohistorians, oral historians, and gender historians. All of these groups can approach the same event or concept and look at them in an entirely different way simply due to the way the historical approach they are accustomed to views things.
Herodotus and Sima Qian were undoubtedly great historians due to their substantial advancements in history writing. Thomas R. Martin concludes that the link between Herodotus and Sima Qian is their common goal to create history as a guide to the past, and that the history they create is left up to individual interpretation. Although the time period, backgrounds, and situations between the two historians were vastly different, comparing both of their work is an opportunity to view the writing of history across cultures and around the world. Their ability to write intricate and lengthy histories during the time in which they lived and under the circumstances they faced make them great historians. The way they composed their material and shared it with the world should be recognized and accounted for.
Who would have thought that writing about yourself could actually have an effect on others? This is actually the case with many autobiographies in history. Take Benjamin Franklin’s The Autobiography for example; in this piece, Franklin describes his own attempt at self improvement. He lists several virtues he was going to attempt to obtain, but he wasn’t successful in becoming the perfect man he had set out to be. However, this work of literature would prove to be very effectual. Benjamin Franklin’s The Autobiography had an effect on both himself and society especially through the ideas of industry, justice, and order.
The education of an author on their topic is the biggest contributor to their reliability; having enough prior knowledge and background information on a subject is crucial when providing a historical analysis. An author’s personal background is of great importance as well, because their personal heritage and beliefs may lead to bias and misrepresentation of information, which removes all credibility of them and/or their work as source. Partiality, favoritism, and/or prejudice towards a specific demographic can create a blurred line between what is fact and what is opinion, which in turn can allow for personal assessments to be presented as arguments and facts even though they have been influenced to a great extent by prior thoughts and opinions.
Second, the historian must place himself within the existing historical debate on the topic at hand, and state (if not so formulaically as is presented here) what he intends to add to or correct about the existing discussion, how he intends to do that (through examining new sources, asking new questions, or shifting the emphasis of pre-existing explanations), and whether he’s going to leave out some parts of the story. This fulfills the qualities of good history by alerting readers to the author’s bias in comparison with the biases of other schools of scholarship on the topic, and shows that the author is confident enough in his arguments to hold them up to other interpreta...
Usually, biographies describe the experiences or a specific incident in a person’s life. During the first colonies, women were unable to read or even spell therefore they were not capable of writing her own stories. Suffrage women had the opportunity to share their stories through their writings on their journals. “There are as well impressive biographies, often by relatives, describing the individual experiences of suffrage women, though in the more benighted versions of these women emerge as dehumanized saints”(3). During this era many people were able to document their experiences and stories through portraits and paintings but as it was stated in the book “founding sisters had neither the time nor the money nor the ego to sit for their
John Lewis Gaddis, in his book, The Landscape of History, generates a strong argument for the historical method by bringing together the multiple standpoints in viewing history and the sciences. The issue of objective truth in history is addressed throughout Gaddis’s work. In general, historians learn to select the various events that they believe to be valid. Historians must face the fact that there is an “accurate” interpretation of the past ceases to exist because interpretation itself is based on the experience of the historian, in which people cannot observe directly (Gaddis 10). Historians can only view the past in a limited perspective, which generates subjectivity and bias, and claiming a piece of history to be “objective” is simplistic. Seeing the world in a multidimensiona...
In the simplest form, there is a basic structural pattern to narratives, as expressed through Tzvetan Todorov’s explanation of narrative movement between two equilibriums. A narrative begins in a stable position until something causes disequilibrium, however, by the end of the story, the equilibrium is re-established, though it is different than the beginning (O’Shaughnessy 1999: 268). Joseph Cam...
"I once asked myself, how history was written. I said, "I have to invent it." When I wish as now to tell of critical incidents, persons, and events that have influenced my life and work, the true answer is all of the incidents were critical, all of the people influenced me, everything that happened and that is still happening influences me."