General Thoughts: History Extension (2 Viewers)

[loversinjapan]

Both were fine. Wrote three booklets for each.
Question 1 was deeeep and interesting too. My take on it was that practices in the past tended to reject either imagination (Von Ranke) or discipline (Hayden White) but ultimately, it is the amalgamation of both that allows history to resonate with our sense of humanity as the imagination (Used Phillip Cummins author of Clio's scroll, but then realized he marks the exam when I walked out....fuck) reveals the humanity of the historians and sources while discipline appeals to our need for validation and integrity, and the mix of two gains the 'potency' that the source was talking about.
Question 2: Pretty generic, it suited well for Elizabeth's I construction of identity and gender well enough. I did it first hoping it would buy me some time on question 1 but still took an hour to do it :/

are we the same person? (though i did political and admin leadership/changes in systems of gov/gender in q2)

It perhaps has a role with the audience, but not in the composition of the history itself, surely.
Karl Marx: "Freeman and slave, patrician and plebian, lord and serf etc.... I imagine that they wore red clothes and were really angry. I also imagine that this will happen again and again, as I imagine that class struggle is the locomotive for change (in which I imagine)."

i interpreted imagination in 2 ways, the obvious + it also lends itself to diverging from the strict bounds of traditional academia and scholarship/going into streams of media, exhibitions and alternative mediums

 

[Kowther]

Overall it was alright. Wrote 4 pages for both but only because 1. I went blank and 2. I ran out of time.

I found question 1 a bit hard and tended to repeat myself a lot. Question 2 was great.

 

[mrbananaman]

I had something along the lines of historical integrity, agenda and purpose of the way history is constructed ..

Yep same here. I talked about how the construction of history fused the rigidity of objectivity with the creativity/subjectivity of the imagination, and how while historians strive towards pure objectivity, often to fill the "silences" etc imagination is necessary. Used historians to show both objectivity and imagination, so hopefully markers will be satisfied

And I wrote 3 booklets each.

 

[Lina3]

are we the same person? (though i did political and admin leadership/changes in systems of gov/gender in q2)



i interpreted imagination in 2 ways, the obvious + it also lends itself to diverging from the strict bounds of traditional academia and scholarship/going into streams of media, exhibitions and alternative mediums

Wait, so you merged several issues from the case study for question 2? I interpreted imagination as the biases of the historian as he endeavors to recapture the feelings of the past and literal imagination (ie when there are gaps in record).

 

[bhsrepresent]

what were the questions?

 

[CaffeineMotor]

Questions were not too bad. I wrote plenty for each, but I stumbled around with the first question, I had all the content but I just feel my wording was all over the place and thus my argument is there but 'scattered'.

Q2 was a surprise because I thought context had been done recently and wouldn't be touched again. However, it wasn't too much of a problem for my case study (Historicity of Jesus).

Overall though I do feel I could have done so much better...

 

[loversinjapan]

Wait, so you merged several issues from the case study for question 2? I interpreted imagination as the biases of the historian as he endeavors to recapture the feelings of the past and literal imagination (ie when there are gaps in record).

yep for q1 my main debates were changes in government (factionalism, puritan opposition, house of commons/lords, privilege of the privvy/patronage issues) and her political/administrative leadership, but most historians (with the exception of doran) have focalised her gender as a central element in drawing their judgements, so that underpinned almost everything

yeah 'imagination' is pretty polysemic, there will be a lot of interpretations (i explored imaginative mediums in the context of the technological revolution, 'filling in the silences' and linked it with his submission that historians tell "two stories"->hence having to balance both discipline and imagination e.g. 'historical narratives' (herodotus) v. a disciplinary approach (empiricists)

 

[Mutant Kitty]

In hindsight, should have mentioned more about the Annales school in terms of their history of mentalities. Feck, there goes a couple of marks, works well with imagination.
I tend to take things literally though, it is safer and I believe that it eliminates problems with interpretation, that is just me though...
I stated that historians will generally claim to hardly use imagination, as generally (noting some exceptions) historians make claim to objectivity as they reconstruct the past with fact (however selective their use of evidence may be).
I'm finding it hard to articulate what I said, sorry....

 

[Mutant Kitty]

Questions were not too bad. I wrote plenty for each, but I stumbled around with the first question, I had all the content but I just feel my wording was all over the place and thus my argument is there but 'scattered'.

Q2 was a surprise because I thought context had been done recently and wouldn't be touched again. However, it wasn't too much of a problem for my case study (Historicity of Jesus).

Overall though I do feel I could have done so much better...

Your section 2 topic was great for that question.

 

[loversinjapan]

In hindsight, should have mentioned more about the Annales school in terms of their history of mentalities. Feck, there goes a couple of marks, works well with imagination.
I tend to take things literally though, it is safer and I believe that it eliminates problems with interpretation, that is just me though...
I stated that historians will generally claim to hardly use imagination, as generally (noting some exceptions) historians make claim to objectivity as they reconstruct the past with fact (however selective their use of evidence may be).
I'm finding it hard to articulate what I said, sorry....

that sounds spot on, don't apologise i wholly get what you're saying

 

[Lina3]

yep for q1 my main debates were changes in government (factionalism, puritan opposition, house of commons/lords, privilege of the privvy/patronage issues) and her political/administrative leadership, but most historians (with the exception of doran) have focalised her gender as a central element in drawing their judgements, so that underpinned almost everything

yeah 'imagination' is pretty polysemic, there will be a lot of interpretations (i explored imaginative mediums in the context of the technological revolution, 'filling in the silences' and linked it with his submission that historians tell "two stories"->hence having to balance both discipline and imagination e.g. 'historical narratives' (herodotus) v. a disciplinary approach (empiricists)

Wow, I have a feeling you are going to do really well! I'm not smart enough to have thought of combining the several debates so I just focused on how historians have addressed the point of conflict between Elizabeth the 'body politic' (ie 'Virgin Queen' and 'Gloriana') and her identity as a woman. Used Mendell Creighton, GR Elton, Susan Bassett and Anna Whitelock.

 

[loversinjapan]

Wow, I have a feeling you are going to do really well! I'm not smart enough to have thought of combining the several debates so I just focused on how historians have addressed the point of conflict between Elizabeth the 'body politic' (ie 'Virgin Queen' and 'Gloriana') and her identity as a woman. Used Mendell Creighton, GR Elton, Susan Bassett and Anna Whitelock.

i'm definitely not smart ahahah i just have a fantastic teacher who provided me with some articles that integrated debates (which is where i got the idea), but your approach sounds really solid and i would be confident in it if i were you (judging from your posts which i've stalked)

 

[Lina3]

i'm definitely not smart ahahah i just have a fantastic teacher who provided me with some articles that integrated debates (which is where i got the idea), but your approach sounds really solid and i would be confident in it if i were you (judging from your posts which i've stalked)

LOL I was initially confident but starting to have second thoughts :/ Oh well, I was sort of anxious for this exam because I met a teacher at a lecture that apparently knew the teacher who was writing the exam and he APPARENTLY told her the question will be difficult and 'out of the box' because they want to catch out the rote learners. Whether that worked or not, I am certainly glad the questions were not too adventurous.

 

[mashi123]

i talked about the role of creative reconstruction (natalie zemon davis), empiricism/scientific history as discipline (von ranke contrast to carr) and finished up with new mediums such as film which employ imagination with some discipline (simon schama)

 

[Queenroot]

aced it

 

[Amaranth_]

aced it

Do you even extension?

 

[Queenroot]

Do you even extension?

Yeah bro state rank

 

[Amaranth_]

Yeah bro state rank

That, or else...

 

[Queenroot]

That, or else...

Or else? Whatchu gonna do

 

[Amaranth_]

Or else? Whatchu gonna do

Nothing