Historiography essay... order of points??? (1 Viewer)

[mal]

In my school we concentrated on only cotemporary historians, the oldest being elton, yet Marx is the exception to this. But most of our historians are responding to the other elements of historiographical debate, such as Hobsbawn Windschuttle and Reynolds. Even though it is limited, judging from what others are doing, Thucydides and Herodotus, it enables us to exaplin the original theories and they are contantly being changed and what the contemporaries perceive the past to be, but in a sense historiography is about change, so inctead of focusing on th instigators of the theory we are gambling to focus on the historiographical change in todays situation. I hope it pays off for us. Does anyone have any comments to this?

 

[HannieStar]

I go to a public school and they mark really really hard- I think in some ways it is good but in other ways it is bad because you often feel really unconfident about your work and feel that all you hard work is getting you nowhere.

psycho_mushy- lots of public schools mark v. hard. and a lot of private schools mark easy and vice versa

 

[arls]

thanks for contributions guys... its given me some food for thought!! psych.. if u went okay in trials then dont worry.. if you didnt do as the others say.. and just memorise sum extra stuff today and tomorow.. if you got the harper book use it its really good.. or even go to the library your bound to find it!

dont worry its only one unit.. and im sure ull do well!

 

[arls]

Originally posted by mal
In my school we concentrated on only cotemporary historians, the oldest being elton, yet Marx is the exception to this. But most of our historians are responding to the other elements of historiographical debate, such as Hobsbawn Windschuttle and Reynolds. Even though it is limited, judging from what others are doing, Thucydides and Herodotus, it enables us to exaplin the original theories and they are contantly being changed and what the contemporaries perceive the past to be, but in a sense historiography is about change, so inctead of focusing on th instigators of the theory we are gambling to focus on the historiographical change in todays situation. I hope it pays off for us. Does anyone have any comments to this?

Personally, I would think that Herodotus and Thuc are pretty important to compare the changes in historiographical methods since history began as a practice. but if your teacher is good, and experienced i guess they know what theyre doing and you've probably got enough stuff to relate to the source!

Ring the advice line to be sure.. but if you can relate your material to the source then why not just use contemporaries? It would set you apart from the thuc/herodotus ppls.. but seriously.. go the advice line i don wanna make you fail!

 

[psycho_mushy]

I feel so sick after reading this thread about memorising 6 historians when I went to my teacher today and said that what I have now is fine..... mind u he's a "doctor"... like a doctorate thing and he's been in the thing for like 30 years... so gee dunno.....

I'll think I'll phone the bozos later and see what they say!

 

[SmokedSalmon]

which historians are u studying psycho?
hehe 'bozos'... ask for justin (history ext teacher). he really helped me when I had queries.

 

[psycho_mushy]

we didn't study any!

our teacher just said read teh books and you'll get it!

I'm doing ranke, gibbons and some other randoms from the book of readings... damn it....

I wish I had a hot history teacher instead dammit!

 

[arls]

Originally posted by SmokedSalmon
which historians are u studying psycho?
hehe 'bozos'... ask for justin (history ext teacher). he really helped me when I had queries.

hey yeah.. i just rang the hsc advice line and got him too! he was really good.

It was so funny.. my family bag me out for using the bozos way too much... cause i do.. every question i got i usually ring them up or something.. cause im like "it only costs 25 cents, such good value.. better value than stupid private school fees!" anyway.. so i was talking to justin on the phone about kennedy stuff... and the phone cut out.. i was like okay then, stuff it i wont ring him back cause i was almost done anyway. But 5 minutes later my sister screams up the hall "Arls, its Justin from the Hsc advice line on the fone!!!!!" My whole family were pissing themselves laughing that THEY were ringing ME this time!!! (they didnt realise i had been cut off.) anyways.. just had to share that one for a few crackups.. hope that makes u laugh pysch, u sound a bit down.

dont worry, youve still got tomorow and im sure ure teacher has taught u well if he is a doctor or whatever..
btw, i said harper was the text ITS NOT! I can never remember authors.. but its actually WARREN called 'access to history'.. i find it really good... anyways..

 

[psycho_mushy]

yeah I have that book as well, access to history!

that was a funny crackup story arls! such a sweetie sometimes! does he sound cool?

I do appeasement, and I'm actually starting to do notes now.... historiography I think may be less concernable because we have texts, but then appeasement I lost all most notes... so I'm making them again...

what option do u do arls? hehehehehe... I hope u and me go well... well not so me but u get what I mean!

 

[arls]

im doing kennedy... its soo interesting an compliments the stuff we did in modern with vietnam and all. Ive really enjoyd it and its made x history easy and fun for me! (not like bloody 2 unit.. i hated that and was so bad at it.. funny isnt it?)

but yeah.. i guess thats cause i liked the topics, and im a person whoes more analytical rather than 2unit vomit out the information you already know.. which i find hard to remember.. and im always analysing it too much!

 

[psycho_mushy]

I'm the opposite....

oh well I'm off.... the sleeping pills are kicking in!

good night arls and sweet dreams!

tmr talky talky!

 

[SmokedSalmon]

Originally posted by arls
im doing kennedy

JFK is the best case study. I know mostly about public and private life and his relations in Cuba. And there are documentaries on the history channel (got cable?) about him too. Its interesting to analyse the nature of Kennedy's presidency and the contrasting views between the traditionalists and revisionists, and camelot historians (hersh). They are so clear and concise! It shall be depressing though, once i'm done with this... its off to uni for science courses. (chem, physics and bio... what am I thinking?) No more history... for now.

 

[AsyLum]

ok i can officially say im totally screwed.....what the fuck....historians .... we were being trialed upon the debate of historiography in contemporary society... thats the right focus right ??

 

[arls]

Originally posted by AsyLum
ok i can officially say im totally screwed.....what the fuck....historians .... we were being trialed upon the debate of historiography in contemporary society... thats the right focus right ??

Umm... if you dont know any historians i dont know waht your teacher wsa thinking... is he/she good? if you do know historians and your covering all of the syllabus dot points (you know those 5 questions that your meant to answer???) then i spose thats okay.. too late to change it now anyway! the purpose of the course is to compare what historians say and most importantly WHY they say it and HOW they collect evidence to suit their PURPOSE and AUDIENCE..... so if you can integrate all that stuff id stop worrying and do a few prac essays today to make your self feel confident.. any other questions give me a yell..

i aggre with you salmon.. i adore JFK.. iwould have been the biggest jfk devotee in his time!! hes just so cute!!

and yeah, i do hersh as well.. the bastard journalist! i think its so interesting. my essays, i always compare Hersh the bastard to Schlesinger the wafty lovey dovey one! Its the best contrast!! and then i compare Schlesinger (vietnam) with THomas Reeves the moralistic catholic... who rips k to pieces cause of his lack of morals ("Kennedy experimented with marijuana, cocaine, hashish, acids whilst in the white house!!!!!!!!" can you believe it??")

i will be sad to leave jfk... *wipes tear* but yeah.. those docos on cable.. a mate of mine's got cable and said shed tape them for me cause she loves jfk too!!! so yeah... itl be good.

 

[~QuEEN V~]

Originally posted by SmokedSalmon
It is kind of hard to fail essays... I always seem to get 19s from my school and they mark very harshly (being private school and all).

Originally posted by psycho_mushy
yeah smoked salmon.... same goes my school..... bloody privates

in public's they mark so easily and fark... that's discrimination!

i can't say i agree with both u there and i think u should both STOP making generalisations like that!!! i go to a public school and my teacher, despite the fact that a lot of essays in our class are of high quality has never given anyone anything above 22/25. meanwhile, one of my friends who goes to a private school gets marked very easily...in fact i think his class average is like 47 or something and believe me, my friend ain't some genius. u cant really say that private schools or public schools mark easy or hard as it's really dependent on the teacher and their marking style!

BTW...good luck to everyone for tommorow...what time is the exam again...1.55pm???

 

[SmokedSalmon]

Originally posted by AsyLum
ok i can officially say im totally screwed.....what the fuck....historians .... we were being trialed upon the debate of historiography in contemporary society... thats the right focus right ??

well if it has been working for you in your school exams then you got nothing to fear. People use a few historians for a particular era i.e. Ranke in relation to the Enlightment Period (went against it) or Herodotus in relation to the Classical period. So they can be more direct I guess.

 

[AsyLum]

ahh ok, basically thats what i had, we concentrated on a few historians and mainly upon the australian debate of it....

 

[lazybum]

australian debate? this is a lost cause