Thinking about the Past

Eric Wilson - 2013

“Life…is a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.” -- William Shakespeare, Macbeth

Think of the childhood classic – The Telephone Game.  Kids sit in a row, and a simple statement is whispered in the ear of the first child.  This phrase is repeated by that child to the next on down the line, each with a whisper in the words of that child.  What happens to the original statement by the time it gets to that last child?

Everyone can retell stories about the past, but how often do you think critically about the stories of the past and their relationship to other stories or their significance on the future?  Most of us never take a moment to think that we are part of a much larger telephone game.  Far too few recognize that the stories we tell ourselves and others about the past are examples of historical thinking.  Stories told and then retold are often riddled with distortions of our own making
.

Edward "Ted" Carr – a realist, Marxist, and opponent of empiricism within historiography – was best known for his book “What is History?” in which he laid out historiographical principles rejecting traditional historical methods and practices and raised some legitimate discussions on how history is told.

“When we call a historian objective, we mean I think two things.  First of all, we mean that he has a capacity to rise above the limited vision of his own situation in society and in history – a capacity which, as I suggested in an earlier lecture, is partly dependent on his capacity to recognize the extent of his involvement in that situation, to recognize, that is to say, the impossibility of total objectivity.  Secondly, we mean that he has the capacity to project his vision into the future in such a way as to give him a more profound and more lasting insight into the past than can be attained by those historians whose outlook is entirely bounded by their immediate situation.” Edward Carr (What is History? – 1961)

History requires a value judgment and inferences based on assumptions; both by the teller and the receiver.  In our telephone game of history, when a given historian identifies with a given group of people and writes his or her history, it often highlights the positive characteristics of those people and the negative characteristics of those with who they are or were in conflict.  No matter how impartial the teller is there will always be a bias of perception and relative importance of different facts.  No matter how impartial the receiver is they will always hear it or process it with a bias of perception and relative importance of different facts.  The seemingly same event can be illuminated by different conceptualizations (i.e. different political, social, and economic theories about people and social change).  This continues down the line from one history to the next providing an infinite number of “histories.”

Our view of the past is largely prejudiced by our upbringing, experiences, and groups that have influenced us.  We see the past through the lenses we have created in our own minds.  We want to see the past in a certain way, so we do.  We have been taught to see the past in a certain way, so we see it that way.  We rarely question what we know or who told us (if it is on the internet, it has to be true, right?)

“The belief in a hard core of historical facts existing objectively and independently of interpretation of the historian is a preposterous fallacy, but one which it is very hard eradicated.” Edward Carr (What is History? – 1961) 

If we are to create free-thinking and critical societies, we will need to think critically about history.

-          We will need to view the past in ways that are less biased.  Remember or recognize that bias is not found just in secondary sources; primary sources can also and are usually biased as well.

-          We need to look beyond the stories and facts and better understand the sources.  Who it is, who is their audience, and why they are telling the history?

-          We should compare history to histories and utilize reason.  Are there other positions and different perspectives on the same history?

-          We will need to question with boldness.  This does not only mean the facts as they are presented, but the teller of those facts, and even more importantly – the receiver (meaning YOU).

We also need to view history as relevant to today and useful for tomorrow.  We need to look beyond the inert data of facts, dates, places, and names.  We cannot isolate history into random events and occurrences but must synthesize it together and understand the connections and causes.  History needs to be used and absorbed into the mind to color everything you know and are currently seeing.  It should lead to conclusions on the present and future, and history should lead to investigation and greater knowledge.

We cannot discount the importance of history, but we must understand and strive to see it more clearly and its significance.  History is not a list of dates, names, and events to file away up in your memory.  It is a catalog of stories told about the past that – when told and understood insightfully and deeply – can help us live better in the future.  We will need to use our understanding of the past to help us make better decisions in the present and future.  We need to be vigilant and seek out the past and use critical thinking to better understand the present.

“History is never independent of the potsherds and written edicts that remain from past reality, for their very existence demands explanation.  The past cannot impose its truths upon the historian, but because the past is constantly generating its own material remains, it can and does constrain those who seek to find out what once took place.” Joyce Appleby, Lynn Hunt, and Margaret Jacob (Telling the Truth about History – 1994)