Which HISTORIANS are you all covering???? (1 Viewer)

[captnpornstar]

reynolds vs windshuttle

hey yall

in terms of the windschuttle vs reynolds debate, it is interesting to note that windschuttle was in fact a extreme Left winger during vietnam war and then lurched violently towards the right in recent years in regards to the whole aboriginal issue...

but what is important in terms of this debate is not the emphasis on Left vs Right. While history is highly political, the history extension course is not a chance to launch our political careers and aspirations.

We should really focus on the whole empiricist vs revisionist history debate. Reynolds is a revisionist, who has focused on the emergence of a "history from below"- one of Aboriginal dispossession of culture, and carries a "black armband of history". Meanwhile, Windschuttle tends to be more of a historicist (like elton) and still too preoccupied with the notion of "historical objectivity".

Hope this helps y'all. Any feedback appreciated.

 

[fluke]

youre exactly right. Windschuttle does suck. i agree completely

 

[sif not 99]

go hug some trees, apologise to 1,000 aboriginals whilist living in a permanent gut renching state of guilt and go join a trade union

 

[fluke]

you forgot my black armband

 

[Arch-man]

My line-up, as such, includes:

von Ranke
Bury
Marsden
Herodotus
Tacitus

 

[captnpornstar]

left-right debate

sif not 99: interesting for u to comment on earlier that "if your a lefty i dont care its up 2 u.... in fact one of my best mates is treasurer of the hornsby branch of young labor"

your friend is probably a right winger him/herself seeing that many in NSW YLA are probably more right-winged than young liberals (esp YLA hornsby branch). NSW Labor party is pretty much dominated by right-wingers, and is pretty much f**ked up by excessive factionalism (esp by the right).

for everyone else.....

i dont think its helpful to betray any political bias if you guys are gonna take a side (i.e. left or right) on this whole Aboriginal debate. First of all, its not the focus of the course... its about historiography not political ideology (if you all feel the need to express your political opinions in ur essays, choose political economy or govt/international relations courses for uni... they're excellent at USYD). Secondly, u dont know whether the markers gonna side with you.

so avoid the left-right debate.... unless the question requires u to specifically address it... very doubtful.

hope this helps

 

[sif not 99]

yeah well my emotions got the better of me there (re. tree hugging spiel above)
factionaly speaking he is of the right of Labor but for u to suggest that he would be more right-wing than the young libs is a pretty interesting suggestion, one of which I will taunt him with when we go back to school, although i think that statement was a little misguided =) although not overly serious on ur part

 

[fluke]

catnpornstar you r a fountain of wisdom. if i wasn't having so much fun with this stupid banter back and forward i might actually admit i dont really agree with reynolds myself...

 

[Anton]

The Aboriginal Issue. Hmm. It's an interesting one.

I'm going to use this as an excuse to be all left-wing on y'all arses and fuck you right-wingers up with statistics that I can remember.

The QLD government, in its submission to the National Inquiry Into The Separation Of Aboriginal And Torres Strait Islander Children From Their Families, claimed that they whole-heartedly respected the Aboriginal right to self-determinism in respect to welfare. That was in 1996-97. However, in 1999, statistics show that despite the fact that Aboriginal population in QLD is around 2% of the population as a whole, 20% of children who are taken away are Aboriginal. And they are taken away generally not due to any particularly quantifiable reason, but simply because the Aboriginal traditions of child-raising vary so significantly from those of western traditions.

Most people know the statistic from the ABS that the life expectancy of Aboriginal people is 55, while the average for the rest of Australia is anywhere from 75-79.

Aboriginals have the respective lowest average GNP per capita of any minority group in any Developed country.

Aboriginals ask me for cigarettes and money MUCH, MUCH more than people of other races, despite only making up 2-3% of the national population. (Ok so that's not a statistic, but it's true).

I used to go to school in Darlington, and would be around the Block in Redfern (that's Abercrombie St.) and I can personally vouch for how absolutely fucked on that particular Aboriginal community is.

Anyone who is any way dismissive of the myriad of ways that Aboriginal people have been fucked over in the past 200 years is an ignorant, ill-informed fuckstick, and I seriously don't care to hear anything from you.

I will say however that saying 'Sorry' and partaking in 'Reconciliation' will mean nothing while the Aboriginal people are still being disadvantaged socially, economically, politically and (obviously) racially. Saying 'Sorry' would be the equivalent of bashing someone up, and while you're laying the boot in, muttering 'my apologies, won't do it again' and then bashing them again.

Ah I'm done and it's 2am and ohmygod I'm tired.

Anton

 

[JEEBUS]

OMG

I AM SO GOING TO FAIL COMPARED TO ALL OF YOU PPL THIS IS DEPRESSING
YEP
THATS IT
I AM NOT DOING THIS EXAM
I JUST SUCK REALLY BAD

I AM ONLY DOING
THUCYDIDES
BEDE
RANKE
AND THE DUDES FOR THE ANNALES SCHOOL

I AM NOT DOING POSTMODERNISM CAUSE I DONT GET IT

 

[!!belle!!]

does anyone know a goodplace to find notes on appeasemet n historians i am stuck

 

[Sarah168]

covering 50 historians by writing a sentence on each isnt exactly a good essay. I think covering a more limited no. (i saw a band 6 response with about 5 historians) in mroe detail is better. Plus being selective allows you to fit their theories into your thesis/argument.

 

[launcher169]

i am doing, well my choices are:
Herodotus
Thucydides
Tacitus
Leopold von Ranke
Marc Bloch
E. H. Carr
Richard Evans
What do u guys think?

 

[silvermoon]

So you can incorporate name-dropping as well as knowledge of both historians and historical thought in one sentence

::
i thought we were supposed to avoid name-dropping at all costs as it indicates to the marker that you only have surface-knowledge of the topic?

 

[Sarah168]

u might get away with name dropping in modern (i dont know about ancient) but i highly doubt you can get away with it in ext hist

 

[Tenille]

You can name drop just make sure you go into depth with your others. ie go on about historian A "this is similar to the opinion of historian B" or historian B discredits this line of agrument

 

[ujuphleg]

name dropping was ok i thought, so long as you can state what the historian did but more importantly WHY they did it and WHAT THE RELATION IS TO THE GIVEN ARTICLE.

the way i see it, the "What is History?" section is like a reverse WWI question in modern. in WWI you look at the question and source then answer the question with your own knowledge working in the source right? with Ext. you analyse the source, working in your own knowledge to support your argument.

Theres a lot of post-modernists out there!!....

In the trials I used:

Herodotus
Von Ranke
Trevelyan
Namier
Croce
Evans

In the HSC I'll probably add a Post-modernist to that mix too -- if the question calls for it.

good luck everyone!

 

[Sarah168]

croce? never heard of that one...

 

[Persephone87]

I used:
Herodotus
Von Ranke
Annales - Bloch and Braudel
Postmodernism - Whire, Elton vs Carr

and for appeasement
Cato
AJP Taylor
P. Kennedy

 

[classics_chic]

Herodotos
Thucydides
von Ranke
MI Finley
And any other random quotes I managed to pick up...

(almost all ancient- it suited me down to the ground!)